Metro Jacksonville

- Hope the new JSO guy can be as effective and well liked as Srgt. Short. He seemed ok, but everyone really liked Short. JSO stated that they haven't seen crime levels in the general area this low since the early 70's.

- The Northside Community Shuttle by JTA program is interesting. It's a good concept at least. Apparently has worked well in other parts of town. Doesn't go on the Eastside of Main though, for some reason. Minimum 2 hour call ahead time is ok, but the presenter made it sound like you better call much earlier than that (like the day before) to assure you have a ride.

- Hogans Creek Plan was VERY impressive. For a preliminary report and design....wow.....it looks very good. Hit a home run with it so far. I think the guy in charge said it would probably take 2-3 years to secure the funding, which is dissappointing but relaistic. It looks like a 100 million+ dollar project. So maybe 5 years from now you're looking at completion?

- unlike what some predicted, there was a public forum at the end of the meeting. noone was "stonewalled". the car wash/conveneince store proposal and the 'tear down unlivable houses / preserve them' argument was brought up. decidedly favored preserving, while demo'ing only certain cases may be ok. (the ghost house on 8th was brought up). calling code enforcement in mass was recommended to get the city's attention on this issue.

- perhaps the most interesting thing that was brought up......apparently there will be a community-wide public forum on the topic of boarding houses in the next few weeks, defintely in November. I sure hope Strider, Sheclow, Stephen, and anyone else who has a strong opinion on this one way or another will show up.

- great shot of JFK on Main Street in the newsletter. i never get mine in the mail. seems as if Louise's column was directly pointed at some of the discussion on this board, as she went through various issues in "fact vs misperception". she dispells a lot of misinformation that was brought up.

all in all good meeting, another 15 minutes of public forum would have been nice, but it was heading towards 9pm.

demo'ing only certain cases may be ok. (the ghost house on 8th was brought up).
Say what?  Please tell me about this ghost house?

If its the one I'm thinking it is, Its one of the remnants of the Van Horn empire. Its not so much a ghost house, as much as the shell of what once was a house. One of the last three or four on 8th St. Its between Silver and Pearl on 8th. He put refurbished windows in it a few years ago, but never finished buttoning it up, and as a result, the thing is quite literally falling apart. It may be a case of it may actually fall down before its torn down.

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Jacksonville,+Duval,+Florida&ll=30.346084,-81.658523&spn=0,359.972126&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=30.346007,-81.657729&panoid=HZSYRyE9OoZxbbBm9vVR6w&cbp=12,230.83,,0,3.72

The one east of it had a pretty big fire a couple of years ago and was eventualy demolished.  We helped our neighbors spray water on their garage to keep it from spreading.

Wasn't there some talk on this forum several months ago about running 1 of the downtown trolleys into SPR?  Or did I dream that?  Has that been discussed lately?

 there was exploration, including a ride with the mayor aorund a possible route, but it's on hold for now i think.

so wait...fsu813, are you saying that SPAR actually had an opn public meeting and took public comment....and are organizing a community forum on the boarding house issue?

I thought some have said this could never happen....or perhaps it is only happening because of the uproar  ;)

I don't think it was so much that it could never happen, it's more that it usually doesn't.

tufsu1,

yup.

The meetings are public it is always that way and I have seen many similar since I have lived in Springfield, there is generally no discussion since very few show up usually.  The meeting dates are posted so everyone who can should show up.
The JFK photo came out of the SHEC archives,  Nixon was also in town that same day

question is.......are you actually going to show up to this boarding house forum?

or, like usual, will you talk about it to exhaustion on MJ but be absent at the meeting.

i'm noticing a pattern, perhaps i'm wrong.

i don't know whether to laugh or yawn.

1) having a public, community meeting on a topic is just fine, don't you agree? If there were too many red-lights, palm trees, stray dogs, BMW's or whatever.....if enough people think there is cause to hold a public meeting about it, why would you be against it? Anyone can share whatever views they have.

2) So you chastize people that say most of the neighborhood doesn't want more boarding/rehab houses, yet when the suggestion of having a door to door survey comes up.......guess what, you critisize it.

Then you chastize SPAR for not being more open & transparent, especially on this issue. You rip them for supposedly only listening to a few board members, ignoring the membership. You rip them for being akin to a members-only Stepford club. You go so far to say you'd be "stonewalled " if you brought i up in the last night's meeting........and guess what, you critisize it when SPAR hosts a very public forum open to the enitre community.

The words "obvious" & "agenda" come to mind, in that order.

Perhaps you know exactly what neighborhood sentiment will be, that's why you'd rather regurgitate a few people's arguments than actually hear what the public has to say?

No, that couldn't be it.....

JFK is riding in an open car right directly in front of Miss Lucy's rooming house!  Got to love the irony. 

(P.S. it was a rooming house back then, too).

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 01:46:14 PM
you really dont get it do you fsu813.

Your little club doesnt really represent the neighborhood anymore.

It really hasnt for a while.

what makes you so sure that your viewpoint does?

Stephen,

oh jeez. don't you learn from your mistakes? you don't know me at all.

last time you guessed as to my personal habits & lifestyle you came up empty.

yet you go back you the same dry well.

the "you don't know what your talking about because you're well-off, white, have a new SRG home, are member of the small SPAR club, and were lured here not knowing how it really is" line. again.

remember what happened last time, Stephen?

"no, i'm not well-off, i don't own an SRG home, & i wasn't lured with false promises here." that was last time.

this time you add the 'white' and 'only talk to certain people' line. good golly.

i thought you were more intelligent than this Stephen, really.

but you don't mind lying to people publically about others you literally don't know. that much is clear.

personally, i'd be embarrassed to guess haphazardly as to someone else's life. but you seem to take pride in your ignorance. well, ok. it takes all kinds.

getting to know me would shatter your ridicuous stereotypes, so for the sake of your argument, i wouldn't.

so spare the "you don't get it, you're the problem" crap. that's irony defined.

Thank you, Dan B for the link and info on the 'ghost house'...I'll also google and see if I can learn more about the "Van Horn empire" so I don't make a pest of myself with the group.  Wish it were possible to safely get pix of the inside of the shell of the house, I can't wait to learn more!  You guys should publish a Springfield book with all your pix and info, seriously.  Peace.

word last night was human feces were visible by looking through the window. not sure you'd want a pic of that =P

 :o   ugh!  no.

i could pick this claim apart, but i digress.

I am very glad that had a real meeting for part of last night. I do have to say that I have been to meetings where board members wanted to have a discussion about something and were "stonewalled".  I have to agree with Stephen that this part of the meeting occurred because the membership at large wanted it too, not that the Executive board wanted it too.

FSU813, I have to admit that I was disappointed at Louise’s letter in the newsletter.  You stated that she addressed many "misconceptions" and so I was looking forward to a few of the hard issues being addressed in some fashion.  Instead, I found the letter missing most of the point of all of this. Not surprising, I must admit. Perhaps she addressed some of them verbally at the meeting?  If so, I would be interested in her comments. As an example, was the subject of elections brought up?

The "ghost house" may actually not be that bad structurally.  It is missing a lot of siding now which makes it look worse than it really is.  Note that it is still very much standing as the "bones" are probably not all that bad.  As to what may or may not be found inside it, anyone around these house very much has seen pretty much that and much worse.  No one knows or cares about all that once the house is restored and beautiful again. Of course, if the empty lot is worth more than a historic house on that part of 8th, then I'm sure it will come down eventually.

And yes, I will plan on attending any "forum" or meeting on the "rooming house" issue.  There are meetings scheduled with the city by both “parties” , so  I would suppose the "forum" will happen after both of those meetings.   

And yes, Ms. Lucy’s Rooming House still looks about the same as it did in 1960.  I think this is the same time that JFK ate dinner here in Springfield at the house on Hubbard street that is now Alco House.  The doctor (can’t remember his name) who owned it at the time was a big Kennedy supporter locally.  He eventually left the house to the non-profit be used as it is now.

i didn't say she addressed every concern, Strider. just many that were brought up int he last couple weeks.

ie,

- there's no list of houses to be demo'd
- what they are involved in specifically
- LOLAS stereotype
etc.

about six topics that are commonly brought up.

Joe, its the Dr Daniels House.

Thanks Dan!  That rang the old bell when I read it.

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 01:16:52 PM
No that isnt the question fsu813.

The question is who the hell are you to have a forum on someone else's right to be there.

We are the people who have already invested our time, sweat and blood in homes we love. We are the people who would love to see businesses which serve the community AND bring those from out side the community here. We are the people who would like to reverse the negative opinion most of our city has about the Springfield neighborhood. We, of all people, have the right to have our say in whether a business should be part of our community. The city has zoning laws to control the types of businesses that can be opened in certain areas. Would your argument be the same if it were an adult entertainment facility (read strip club, video store, etc.) going in?

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 01:16:52 PM
Why not have a public forum about what to do with SPAR.

There are many residents who want SPAR out of the neighborhood now (as you can see from the grafitti that has been popping up around the neighborhood)

I think I have mentioned in posts on anther thread that I am taking a wait and see attitude towards SPAR. I do not harbor any ill will towards anyone there, more like disappointment in how things have been run lately. As are many others. Graffiti is hardly a measure of neighborhood displeasure, more an indication that hoodlums need to be reigned in.

You seem to be mounting a full-scale offensive against SPAR. The more you spout your venomous rhetoric, the more cartoonish and ridiculous you look.

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 01:16:52 PM
Seriously?

Your having a neighborhood forum?  You people are breathtaking in your arrogance.

Spoken like a man who is sure that his is the only valid opinion. Several times I have run into you at Three Layers and have expressed how I enjoyed reading the articles on this site. I have praised you on the insightful stories and engaging dialog. But, lately I am just appalled at your pompousness and vitriolic diatribe. And this from someone who no longer lives here and throws stones from across the street.

And now you have lowered yourself to throwing out racial slurs. I am offended where before I was merely annoyed by your ignorance. The next time I see you at Three Layers I will not speak kindly how I enjoy your site. As a matter of fact, I will not even acknowledge your existence, since you have negated my rights as a RESIDENT to express my opinion free from scathing, vile remarks.

I am of a mind to live and let live. I try to speak to people how I wish to be spoken to. But, I am also a proponent of MEANINGFUL debate. You are just a bully who spouts insults and drivel from behind the safety of your trusty laptop, without which you would be marginalized and powerless.

As a reminder, FSU813, I said:

Quote
FSU813, I have to admit that I was disappointed at Louise’s letter in the newsletter.  You stated that she addressed many "misconceptions" and so I was looking forward to a few of the hard issues being addressed in some fashion.  Instead, I found the letter missing most of the point of all of this. Not surprising, I must admit. Perhaps she addressed some of them verbally at the meeting?  If so, I would be interested in her comments. As an example, was the subject of elections brought up?

and you said:

Quotei didn't say she addressed every concern, Strider. just many that were brought up int he last couple weeks.

ie,

- there's no list of houses to be demo'd
- what they are involved in specifically
- LOLAS stereotype
etc.

about six topics that are commonly brought up.

So I take that to mean she did not address any of the tough issues...like explaining her e-mail, the lack of elections, and the various lies and innuendo she and others have been spreading about the rooming house issues.

Just wanted to know.

To Quote From Gonzo:  We, of all people, have the right to have our say in whether a business should be part of our community.

Actually, you have to be careful here.  While the city does have zoning laws and we have the overlay, you cannot use the overlay to discriminate against businesses that offer services to a particular class or type of person.

What is going to happen here in Springfield is that someone, somewhere is going to challenge the overlay in court and Springfield will lose its overlay.  Or at the very least, the weakness of the overlay will be displayed.

Be careful of the fights you choose to fight.  A car wash/convenience store is certainly not worth it (nor is a sober house).

Quote from: Gonzo on October 30, 2009, 06:55:28 PM

Spoken like a man who is sure that his is the only valid opinion. Several times I have run into you at Three Layers and have expressed how I enjoyed reading the articles on this site. I have praised you on the insightful stories and engaging dialog. But, lately I am just appalled at your pompousness and vitriolic diatribe. And this from someone who no longer lives here and throws stones from across the street.
And now you have lowered yourself to throwing out racial slurs. I am offended where before I was merely annoyed by your ignorance. The next time I see you at Three Layers I will not speak kindly how I enjoy your site. As a matter of fact, I will not even acknowledge your existence, since you have negated my rights as a RESIDENT to express my opinion free from scathing, vile remarks.

Stephen has earned his right speak up for and about Springfield.  Decades of his life have been spent here. 

Honestly, racial slurs?  From Stephen?  Where?

Its more entertaining to argue?

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 01:46:14 PM
But thats because I dont just talk to the uppity white people who live out there.  You should try it sometimes.  It has to be boring talking to the same 25 people all the time.

This is a racial slur, but the reverse of what most people think of as one.

I do not doubt that Stephen has lived her a while, but that does not give him the right to spew the type of venom that is evident here and in the thread talking about the Car Wash.

Done right, I don't see a problem with the car wash. But, done right. Just as I do not have an issue with a thrift store. Many neighborhoods have sprung up on the strength of funky, hip stores of that type. In my home town of St. Louis there is a district known as the Delmar Loop that is just that type of an area. It started as a stroll for the prostitutes, store owners moved in and started putting in retro clothing stores, thrift stores and used vinyl stores. A hip, young crowd began hanging out in the area. Soon the movie theater reopened and began showing art house movies and Rocky Horror at midnight on weekends. Some funky restaurants and coffe houses moved in and a district was born.

The issue I have, is that reasonable people try to have a civil dialog and Stephen hijacks it and twists it to his own agenda. Its OK for him to issue statements of how bad SPAR is but, not OK for people who actually live in the affected area to speak up about the type of businesses are in their neighborhood. Springfield has an abundance of convenience stores. If Mr. Jones would like to add a store to his enterprise, I would be fine with it as long as beer and wine is not sold there and loitering is strictly forbidden. Is that too restrictive? Maybe. But, there is at least six other stores within a four block radius that already serve those segments of the market. The question I posed regarding adult businesses remains unanswered: if a strip club, adult video or toy store wanted to go in, would you support them the same way?

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2009, 09:41:59 PM
Its more entertaining to argue?

IS NOT! :D

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 09:32:22 PM
Well Gonzo.  I still like you.

I have been at the beach taking care of my very ill mother.

Stephen, I am very sorry to hear about your mother. I do not wish that kind of difficulty and heartache on anyone. As someone who lost a parent at an early age to a disease that took its time to do its business, I can certainly empathize.

And as a person, you may not be the devil incarnate. But, here, especially when some folks are trying to have a productive conversation, you butt in with a particularly vapid tact that really works contrary to your supposed goals.

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 09:32:22 PM
If you read the threads you will see that the problem isnt that people are expressing their opinions or wanting input.  Notice that Lake has presented a fairly rational set of suggestions.

No one is interested in them.

What do you think thats about?

I do read the threads and there is a lot of ignorance out there. Some folks post just to stir the pot. Others because of an inflated sense of self-importance. Still others post informative, thoughtful posts --these I really like. Some people provide intelligent counterpoints.

As I say in my previous post, it is when people try to make an intelligence post and the thread gets hijacked and turned into a bash-the-residents free-for-all that I take offense. I don't like seeing others get trampled -- which is why I try to take a middle of the road stance on a lot of things.

What I would like is a return to interesting, constructive debate that can truly help repair some of the wrongs instead of people shouting for other's heads on platters.

Gonzo, I'll try and answer a few of your questions:

QuoteDone right, I don't see a problem with the car wash. But, done right.

What does done right mean?  What are the features that you would classify as "done right."?  These are the things that should be expressed to the owner when he's presenting his business concept.  This is the type of information that can make or break a project.

QuoteIts OK for him to issue statements of how bad SPAR is but, not OK for people who actually live in the affected area to speak up about the type of businesses are in their neighborhood.

Its fine for people to voice their concern about businesses going into the neighborhood.  In fact, it should happen.  Its the only way to ensure that a community develops the long term vision it seeks.  However, those concerns should come in the form of attempting to work with the business owner instead of completely shutting the concept down without really listening.  Its not fine to hijack threads and stay off topic.  It gets annoying for everyone.

QuoteSpringfield has an abundance of convenience stores.

Jacksonville has an abundance of grocery stores.  Should this mean that one should never come to Springfield?  Springfield has an abundance of restaurants.  Should this mean that another one should not open anywhere in the neighborhood?  My guess is if the market is not there for his car wash (which is the real use they want), they will eventually close.  However, if worked with, at least if they close, you end up with a property in better condition than it is today.

QuoteI would be fine with it as long as beer and wine is not sold there and loitering is strictly forbidden. Is that too restrictive?

This is the type of concern that should be addressed when the owner presents his concept.  Were these concerns mentioned last night?  If so, what was his response?

QuoteBut, there is at least six other stores within a four block radius that already serve those segments of the market.

Doesn't Uptown Market sell wine and serve beer?  That appears to be okay, so there is a difference even though several places already sell these products.  What can be done to share with the owner and ensure that the final product is a positive to the community?

QuoteThe question I posed regarding adult businesses remains unanswered: if a strip club, adult video or toy store wanted to go in, would you support them the same way?

I missed this question but there is a big difference.  The store is allowed under the CCG-S zoning, while strip clubs, adult video, adult toy stores are not.  Car washes are allowed by exception, the adult examples, like a coal mine or phosphate plant, are not.  Apples and oranges.  If the community does not want convenience stores, it needs to revise the zoning ordinance it helped crafted.

According to the "spar Speak" on line, :

QuoteNeighbors have voiced concerns and favor a special meeting to give them time to put issues on the table and to help with solutions to those issues. There will be a "Town Meeting" here at the SPAR building next Thursday at 7:00 P.M. This special meeting was not on schedules previously sent out, so be sure to tell your friends and neighbors and ask them to come with you. There is a lot of excitement from people who have heard about our community and want to live here, and many people are voicing their willingness to be involved and do what they can for Springfield. Come on out and lets make some plans for how we can have a crime free, fun filled, peaceful, beautiful community!

So, the date for this meeting is :

QuoteNovember Events

11/5 Town Meeting, 1321 N Main St., 7pm

Could be an interesting meeting....

Quote from: fsu813 on October 30, 2009, 10:07:58 AMcalling code enforcement in mass was recommended to get the city's attention on this issue.

Not trying to re-start WWIII here, but if SPAR keeps that specific BS up, then they're eventually going to run into a landlord who will put the hurt on them. And from the impression I got, this might happen a little sooner than you might think.

There are two problems for SPAR; one being that it's tortious interference and eventually they're going to get clipped for it, but the other one is that every time they do this, doesn't SPAR realize that COJ knows what's going on when all of a sudden they get 100 calls all about the same property? They're just trashing their own credibility downtown every time they do this.

Quote from: stephendare on October 30, 2009, 09:54:19 PM
As an uppity white person, im perfectly entitled to use the term, thank you.

I beg to differ greatly with this argument...no matter who makes it.

Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 31, 2009, 09:03:25 AM

Quote from: fsu813 on October 30, 2009, 10:07:58 AMcalling code enforcement in mass was recommended to get the city's attention on this issue.

Not trying to re-start WWIII here, but if SPAR keeps that specific BS up, then they're eventually going to run into a landlord who will put the hurt on them. And from the impression I got, this might happen a little sooner than you might think.

There are two problems for SPAR; one being that it's tortious interference and eventually they're going to get clipped for it, but the other one is that every time they do this, doesn't SPAR realize that COJ knows what's going on when all of a sudden they get 100 calls all about the same property? They're just trashing their own credibility downtown every time they do this.

It was actually a neighbor who made this comment not a SPAR rep. And the person who owns it actually wants it torn down and we haven't figured out yet why others come down and this one hasn't.

Quote from: nvrenuf on October 31, 2009, 10:23:29 AM

Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 31, 2009, 09:03:25 AM

Quote from: fsu813 on October 30, 2009, 10:07:58 AMcalling code enforcement in mass was recommended to get the city's attention on this issue.

Not trying to re-start WWIII here, but if SPAR keeps that specific BS up, then they're eventually going to run into a landlord who will put the hurt on them. And from the impression I got, this might happen a little sooner than you might think.

There are two problems for SPAR; one being that it's tortious interference and eventually they're going to get clipped for it, but the other one is that every time they do this, doesn't SPAR realize that COJ knows what's going on when all of a sudden they get 100 calls all about the same property? They're just trashing their own credibility downtown every time they do this.

It was actually a neighbor who made this comment not a SPAR rep. And the person who owns it actually wants it torn down and we haven't figured out yet why others come down and this one hasn't.

Ah, OK, that's different then. A short while ago it came out that SPAR had a list of places for people to call in complaints about, so when I read that comment it seemed like this was more of the same. Sorry for jumping to conclusions.

FSU wrote the following
Hogans Creek Plan was VERY impressive. For a preliminary report and design....wow.....it looks very good. Hit a home run with it so far. I think the guy in charge said it would probably take 2-3 years to secure the funding, which is dissappointing but relaistic. It looks like a 100 million+ dollar project. So maybe 5 years from now you're looking at completion?
end quote - I do not know how to do the quoting the other way

I agree the plan looked great, I am sad the Klutho walls would go,  but if you go down Market today the road is flooded - the tide came in and the water comes up into the park from the swamp underneath.  I know it is great the Health Dept land will become park again, but I do not think they allowed enough water catch areas.  When it rains so that we really flood, it is a 15 to 20 acre pond.  I would hate to see all those millions spent and then with a couple of large floods see much washed away.  I know they wish to fill but the weight of the fill pushes the mire and sludge up into the creek - Imeson and Klutho knew what they were doing allowing for water to come up through the bottom of the creek and keeping the river out at high tide.  I know that will not be allowed to happen again so I worry about floods.  If the surrounding park land is raised you know where the water will go.  I understand that the Army Corps of Engineers are now back in the picture, and also any plans for water catchment or drainage have to be looked over and approved by so called water experts - I don't remember the name used.  All in all it is great to see movement on improving the parks and I think something will happend, maybe sooner than we think

All of the Klutho walls would go?

Its not much of a surprise that there is a push for removing the walls. I did quite a bit of reading on Urban creeks back when I was active on the Parks issue. De-channelizing urban creeks is a big trend in the green movement.

Personally, I think it would be an awful thing to do, and that the neighborhood needs to speak up to save its architectural heritage.

I agree Dan B.

isn't work of past on hogan's creek the what ultimately destroyed the castle?

Quote from: cindi on October 31, 2009, 04:25:14 PM
isn't work of past on hogan's creek the what ultimately destroyed the castle?

Which castle, Cindi? Drew Castle at 3rd and Pearl?

If so, The settling is because it was essentially built on a marsh.A friend tells me that the house is in pretty good shape overall, but it needs significant foundation work. It has settled by several feet in some places.

dan, that is the one.  i had obviously been giving erroneous info.  i was told that the last time the city did "diversional" work on hogan's creek it somehow did substantial damage to the basement (the destruction of which i mentioned). we all know that everytime a rain cloud passes over that place it is flooded. 

The Drew house got torn down? Seriously? When was this?

it is not literally torn down, it is still standing.  it just takes a huge beating every time a drop of rain enters the area.  it is sad.  they had it listed for sale a couple years back and had a virtual tour on line that showed the inside - awesome pictures.  it is ashame that someone couldn't help shore up the foundation before it gets to the point of no return.

Quote from: cindi on October 31, 2009, 04:36:41 PM
dan, that is the one.  i had obviously been giving erroneous info.  i was told that the last time the city did "diversional" work on hogan's creek it somehow did substantial damage to the basement (the destruction of which i mentioned). we all know that everytime a rain cloud passes over that place it is flooded. 

Oh, I dont know that your information is wrong. I was just making sure that was the one you were talking about.

A friend of mine looked at buying it a couple of years ago, and was the one who told me about the settling. I thought it was because of the soft marshy area it was built in.

Cindi, you didn't by chance happen to save that link to the Drew Castle pix, did you?  Would love to see the building and the inside.  (Honest, I was born in the wrong century).

I must have it somewhere, it was beautiful.

Some tidbits from the SPAR forum.

Quote from: chris farleyThe Drew castle was built I believe by Dr. Drew, the son on Columbus Drew, one of the "founders" of Jacksonville - I have not looked into this one. I know of Columbus because I believe he is buried in the Old Cemetery. I do believe the Drew Ho]use is of stone

Quote from:  chris farleyI know the one at 4th was the 60s Nasworthy told me, he watched them do it. I thought the bowl of the fountain went in there, but the lake was filled prior to the fountain being pushed over.
The bridge on Pearl took a large slice of the park and also the side yard of the Drew Castle, it is said that the road going too close to the house casued the subsidence.

And this from a wiki

Another Angle

(http://wikimapia.org/p/00/00/42/31/22_big.jpg)

Quote from: cindi on October 31, 2009, 04:42:36 PM
it is not literally torn down, it is still standing.  it just takes a huge beating every time a drop of rain enters the area.  it is sad.  they had it listed for sale a couple years back and had a virtual tour on line that showed the inside - awesome pictures.  it is ashame that someone couldn't help shore up the foundation before it gets to the point of no return.

Whew, OK, my heart skipped a beat. That'd be a huge loss.

I always promised myself if I ever have that kind of money I'd buy and redo that place. I had stopped to look at it out of plain old curiosity back around 2001 or so, and the owner, an older white guy, said hi and told me I could have it for $450k. Which was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much. The place is stunning. You don't realize it from outside but the sub-level amounts to what probably would be a 20-car garage

I have been told several times when they redid the bridge on Pearl they went too close to the Drew Castle and payment was made to the family there to resolve the damage, they took the money and did nothing to prevent the subsidence.
I do not want the Klutho walls removed and Imeson was the genious behind preventing the flooding which at that time interfered with the street cars.  I repeat (I know) but the reason the creek has a wooden bottom and two feet of sand was to allow the water from the marsh below up through the bottom of the creek and to prevent the muck coming through as well.  I felt guilty at the meeting since I seemed the only one not "happy" with the plans.  I feel if the walls are removed, then as the chaos theory man said in Jurrasic (Jurassic?) Park "nature will out".  The Imeson plan reduced the water table in the park and area by 3 feet.
I believe it would take the agreement of the HPC to remove the walls, but they can go LUZ and council.
How do you post pictures on here.  I've got a drawing of the dredge that bulk headed and dredged the creek in 1906,  they just did not keep the river out.
I pulled several articles of the work done on the parks in 1906.  The lake at 4th and Pearl was excavated, an island put in the middle (there is a postcard of it on the back of the current SPAR newsletter), they gave it a clay bottom.  Imeson/Klutho kept the lake in the same place but removed the island and moved the lake over a littlee.

Stider said: "So I take that to mean she did not address any of the tough issues...like explaining her e-mail, the lack of elections, and the various lies and innuendo she and others have been spreading about the rooming house issues."

Correct. These issues prolly take a lot of backstory & what not.

Stephen Dare said:

"I have criticised SPAR, but have never seriously challenged their right to be in the neighborhood.  I havent ever tried to demolish their building, I havent harrassed them by making multiple complaints to the regulatory committees that govern not for profits, etc.  In short I have criticized them on their merits but taken no aggressive action against them.

This is a critical difference between simply criticizing and the type of behavior that is going on out there.

Its apples and oranges man.

What caused this dustup was an email authored not by the critics of SPAR, but by the executive director of the organization."

- ok, so you've never "seriously" challenged thier right to be here? (ha) All i good fun i suppose, huh.

- if making unsubtantiated claims, creating propaganda, calling SPAR board members place of employment, exaggerating the meaning of out-of-context emails, calling for the heads of SPAR members, twisting facts to fit your agenda, and stereotyping random SPAR membership.....all in public........isn't "harrassing", i'm not sure what is.

- critisizing on merits? (1) you have only recognized the "negative" things SPAR does, while ignoring the positive. Merits is a 2 way street, if you are trying to be legitmate. (2) what merits do you have to inaccurately call me an (paraphrasing) "snotty, well-off, SRG owning, elistist, white, SPAR member who clearly has no idea what the neighborhood is really like or what's best for it" ? (ha) i'd be curious.

- you have taken no "aggresive action" towards SPAR? no, just tried to initate thier downfall. that's all. what aggressive action has SPAR taken towards you? None. Yet you blame them for demoing your bulidng, something which they cannot do.

- what caused this "dust up" was someone fishing for anything that had the appearnace of contraversy, blowing it out of proportion & context, and trying to take the opprotunity to bash on any number of topics in general.

You be high on ....life..... to believe 2/3rds of the rhetoric you produce on this topic. in fact, i don't believe you do, as you have made yourself a hypocrite many times over in the past few weeks.

Please come to the Town Hall meeting to tell the large group of uppity, white, elitist, wealthy, been-here-5-minutes, LOLAS that thier opinions are wrong and they are really hurting the neighborhood. There should only be a few, right? Since SPAR is severly dwindling, right?

Perhaps your dream will come true and they'll just disolve the organization right then & there.

"As an outcome of Louises actions as revealed in the email, she should resign and that SPAR spends too much time launching crusades against people and issues rather than for the neighborhood."

- since you know, what percentage of her time does she spend on this? oh, let me guess.....you don't really know.....you just made another assuption. hopefully it's more accurate than your assumptions of me. those didn't end well for you.

"Along the way, you and a couple of other of the spar members have made yourselves into spectacles with a fairly hysterical set of screeds about how unfair it is to notice what Louise wrote rather than what you wish she hadnt."

- and so the misrepresenting begins. at least it's the second bullet point and not the first this time.
i never said anything of the sort Stephen. go back and look at all my comments. never. what I said was unfair is that you take an out-of-context email with no backstory and make broad assumptions off of it, without even going to the the source. (ha). That's irresponsible journalism, someone from "the media" should know that. I think people need a Stephen Dare filter.....so that people can see what one write, then see how Stepehn interprets it.


"SPAR needs a change in leadership.  This is the consensus privately of majority of the SPAR people.  They don't know who should replace Louise, that is really the only holdup.   If Louise cared a bit more for the organization, she would have done the decent thing, resigned and offered to train someone."

- perhaps, perhaps not. i couldn't say either way. i don't know anyone else who can devote the time, energy, has intricate knowledge and reputation as she does. and, quite frankly, i don't beleive you when you cite "the secret majority" of anyone. you've purposely mistated far too much to have any cred on this issue.

"Apparently you finally will have a forum for Springfield that is no longer message controlled by SPAR and therefore not subject to these embarrassing 'cancellations' when the conversation is embarrassing to the SPAR leadership."

- we've had one: MJ. othwise you wouldn't be involved in all this. again you mistate for your agenda. the SPAR website is down for rehab. There were several reoccuring issues that i personally noticed that needed to be taken care of, don't know what else they are doing. Perhaps you could just ask what all will be improving instead of making stuff up to fit your agenda?

"For the first time in years, the SPAR board felt it necessary to actually have a public comments section and listen to its membership.  Of course they had banned a few people from coming to the meeting, in effect censoring their viewpoint, but still...a good step."

- again, not true. i've been to another meeting in the past year that random questions have been asked at the end. i'm not familar with the "banning", but i know you weren't banned.

"Don Downing and his unruly youngster in the office are apparently finally administering the kind of program that neighborhood groups should be administering:  the facade deal.  Its about freaking time."

- a backhanded compliment is better than non coming from you, i guess. what makes him the youngster "unruly"? Is it because he posted how you blantantly lied to him? also, yes it's good see the facade project. but since it's "about freaking time", what other organization could have done this sooner? nooone.

"The long list of negative campaigns has been outed, letting people see that there is a whole lot of positive work that is going undone as a result."

- negative campaigns.....hmm....the only one i see is the boarding house issue. where are the other campaigns?

"If you review the threads, you and mcvay and to a lesser extent a couple of others have done everything in your power to keep everyone divided, and not allow them to find any common ground."

- you are becoming more absurd by the week, Stephen. by you typing it doesn't make it true, sorry to disappoint. i don't sit idley while someone lies/exaggerates about this or that, trying to create contraversy. i dislike noone in the neighborhood personally, and i'm willing to wager noone i've met dislikes me personally. i know for a fact the same can't be said for you.

Pot: Hey, Kettle.
Kettle: Yeah?
Pot: You're black.

"And seriously friend, if you think I have any fears whatsoever of speaking a consistent story in public, you don't know anything about me."

- never said anything of the sort. creating an argument where none exists.

"1.  I don't believe that it would have helped.
2.  It was important for people to have a space to come to consensus or draw their own conclusions without a polarizing of the room monopolizing the conversation.
3.  Louise deserved a chance to speak to her membership herself and present her side of the story (something she still has not bothered to do with myself---despite the open channel that I keep for her) as well as do something that would have been audaciously decent, which would have been resign."

- 1. you are correct, various positive things in the neighborhood were presented. 2. i think you could care less about this, just an excuse. 3. i'm sure she would discuss "her side" with anyone that asked her. i'm sure she has done so in private. but i seriously doubt that she would with the same person that is still exaggreating claims in an effort to out her.

"My suggestions are simple:  A neighborhood summit and the two years overdue elections should be held."

- The absurdity continues. A neighborhood forum is already planned, as I stated on MJ Friday morning......in which you promptly critisized it. You ranted on about how people don't have a right o decide about blah blah blah. Why the change in tune? I'm sure that you can raise your questions with whomever there.

Again, if you show up.

I attend almost every SPAR, Shadco, SAMBA meetings....where good public disussion & opinions are heard, and i've seen you at one, over the past year. Affter arguing over the BP, you didn't shop up to the next Shadco, you seemed surpirsed about the Main Street facade details even though it was been discussed in various meetings, and you have so much to say online about SPAR, but you don't show up to the meeting. Good grief.

Just a guy behind a computer who likes to bash away, suggest how things should be done, but then takes no action on it. Doesn't even participate in the most popular neighborhood events or community organizations.

But....you can write a good story, no?

I don't disgaree entirely with much of what you write, Stephen, but you when present it in such a way that is borderline fiction, i can't support it.



























 

How about not backing up the lies.  If the topic is not directly dealing with the first post of this thread, don't post it here.  Either discuss in person or take the neighborhood diatribes somewhere else.

Here is the original post and topic of the discussion for those who may have forgotten.

Quote from: fsu813 on October 30, 2009, 10:07:58 AM
- Hope the new JSO guy can be as effective and well liked as Srgt. Short. He seemed ok, but everyone really liked Short. JSO stated that they haven't seen crime levels in the general area this low since the early 70's.

- The Northside Community Shuttle by JTA program is interesting. It's a good concept at least. Apparently has worked well in other parts of town. Doesn't go on the Eastside of Main though, for some reason. Minimum 2 hour call ahead time is ok, but the presenter made it sound like you better call much earlier than that (like the day before) to assure you have a ride.

- Hogans Creek Plan was VERY impressive. For a preliminary report and design....wow.....it looks very good. Hit a home run with it so far. I think the guy in charge said it would probably take 2-3 years to secure the funding, which is dissappointing but relaistic. It looks like a 100 million+ dollar project. So maybe 5 years from now you're looking at completion?

- unlike what some predicted, there was a public forum at the end of the meeting. noone was "stonewalled". the car wash/conveneince store proposal and the 'tear down unlivable houses / preserve them' argument was brought up. decidedly favored preserving, while demo'ing only certain cases may be ok. (the ghost house on 8th was brought up). calling code enforcement in mass was recommended to get the city's attention on this issue.

- perhaps the most interesting thing that was brought up......apparently there will be a community-wide public forum on the topic of boarding houses in the next few weeks, defintely in November. I sure hope Strider, Sheclow, Stephen, and anyone else who has a strong opinion on this one way or another will show up.

- great shot of JFK on Main Street in the newsletter. i never get mine in the mail. seems as if Louise's column was directly pointed at some of the discussion on this board, as she went through various issues in "fact vs misperception". she dispells a lot of misinformation that was brought up.

all in all good meeting, another 15 minutes of public forum would have been nice, but it was heading towards 9pm.

As it has been discussed, here is the text of Louise DeSpain's letter in the recent SPAR Council newsletter. I am assuming that as this was intended for all of the Springfield area and the residents as well as interested parties, it is OK to post.  Moderators, if I am wrong, please remove it.

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2561/4065059761_a6ec55bcaf_b.jpg)

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3468/4065060351_7001ae17b4_m.jpg)

i'm curious as to why there is no response from the same people who were so harsh about describing how SPAR doesn't communicate well, that the website was taken down to prevent debate, that SPAR has a demo list, that they are nothing but LOLAS, they don't enough things to unite the neighborhood, and they are just up to no good.

again, seems like she wanted to make a point of correcting or clarifying these issues so that the same propaganda couldn't be repeated over & over again.

did it work?

I am curious why it was nessessary for Strider to put the page from the latest newsletter on here,  It did not need any sunshine law to do this, it is being mailed out to all Spar members and is available for pick up.  It is just the continual  hijacking of threads.  Who is it you are trying to convince that what you keep saying is really so, yourself.  As to the Spar forum and web, I was there last week, actually folding newsletters and part of a meeting for the total use and improvement of the web.  Derek was there going over it all with Brenda and Margaret Gloag.  Why keep boxing shadows? 

There was a request that the JFK photo be posted on here, when it went in the newsletter from material that Rita and I (both lolas, probably proudly so) produced, even that produced a completely unnessessary comment which had nothing to do with the situation.

It is sad that informative and productive conversations regarding Springfield keep being turned and turned again to very very unkind comments, I just do not understand.

To me it is quite clear: there are those that want this community to continue successfully revitalizing, and those that do not -- either because it may interfere with what they are attempting to do, or because they have lost credibility as positive contributors. As good things keep happening, they must continually put out information that attempts to discredit those involved as organizers, promoters or participants.

Quote from: fsu813 on November 02, 2009, 07:45:42 AM
i'm curious as to why there is no response from the same people who were so harsh about describing how SPAR doesn't communicate well, that the website was taken down to prevent debate, that SPAR has a demo list, that they are nothing but LOLAS, they don't enough things to unite the neighborhood, and they are just up to no good.

again, seems like she wanted to make a point of correcting of clarifying these issues so that the same propaganda couldn't be repeated over & over again.

did it work?

A quick comment on her comments:

1)Spar never gets the word out….

She simply states what everyone already knows….how the word is supposed to get out and does not address the cases it doesn’t make it, or if all of the “news” gets out or that it is often put out selectively.


2) Spar doesn’t care about saving houses…

She simply restates the “company line”, she did not address the hard issues of the fact that  the houses were put an the fast tract to demolition to start with (as FSU813 said they were on this forum) nor did she address her e-mail that was posted on a different thread.

3) Spar is just a bunch of little old ladies…

Of course the make up of the board is not all little old ladies, she just ignored the whole basis of why the term LOLA exists, or perhaps she proved Stephen right….

4) Spar doesn’t do fun things….

Ok, she’s right on here….  Give her one point.


5) What does SPAR do anyway? 

SPAR Council does do things.  I believe that the vast majority of posters have said that, so this isn’t the issue.  The issue was and still is if what they do is for the betterment of the entire community or just a select few…

And, to quote you:

QuoteStider said: "So I take that to mean she did not address any of the tough issues...like explaining her e-mail, the lack of elections, and the various lies and innuendo she and others have been spreading about the rooming house issues."

Correct. These issues prolly take a lot of backstory & what not.

So, even from your own words earlier, nothing of substance was addressed and so I fail to see where any misconceptions were corrected. Perhaps on Thursday, but then again, it is all a matter of perception after all. If you can feed someone hamburger and convince them it is steak, you win.

QuoteI am curious why it was nessessary for Strider to put the page from the latest newsletter on here,  It did not need any sunshine law to do this, it is being mailed out to all Spar members and is available for pick up.  It is just the continual  hijacking of threads.

It was simply to put it out for those who are not on the mailing list, even when they are members, not able to stop into the office and as far as I can tell, putting Louise's own answers to the concerns expressed here on this forum is far from hijacking this thread.  In fact, as some here believe that this letter answered many mis-conceptions, it seems I did Louise a service by posting it.  I gave her voice the same coverage as those who have been voicing the concerns got. Only seems fair.

So, I am curious as to why someone would consider that it was posted was somehow ...wrong....?

Quote from: zoo on November 02, 2009, 09:45:31 AM
To me it is quite clear: there are those that want this community to continue successfully revitalizing, and those that do not -- either because it may interfere with what they are attempting to do, or because they have lost credibility as positive contributors. As good things keep happening, they must continually put out information that attempts to discredit those involved as organizers, promoters or participants.

I agree with you 100%, I just think we disagree 100% about which group is which...

I can't recall the last time I cashed a check from a developer who buys the vacant lots where the historic houses I'm lobbying the city for fast-track demos of used to stand. I can't recall the last time I tried to ban one of my neighbors from public meeting. I can't recall the last time I went on a rampage, and tried to have my neighbors zoned out of business. I can't recall the last time I wrote an email b!tching at the city for not tearing historic houses down fast enough. The same houses I'm supposed to be protecting.

But yeah...somehow...it's us on this forum who are standing in the way of Springfield's progress. LMFAO!

Proof's in the pudding, during the decade SPAR's been around in its current form/leadership, 1/3 of the neighborhood has been turned into rubble. Why get upset at the people who just point out the obvious flaws in this organization?

Quote from: ChriswUfGator on November 02, 2009, 11:40:10 AM

Quote from: zoo on November 02, 2009, 09:45:31 AM
To me it is quite clear: there are those that want this community to continue successfully revitalizing, and those that do not -- either because it may interfere with what they are attempting to do, or because they have lost credibility as positive contributors. As good things keep happening, they must continually put out information that attempts to discredit those involved as organizers, promoters or participants.

I agree with you 100%, I just think we disagree 100% about which group is which...

I can't recall the last time I cashed a check from a developer who buys the vacant lots where the historic houses I'm lobbying the city for fast-track demos of used to stand. I can't recall the last time I tried to ban one of my neighbors from public meeting. I can't recall the last time I went on a rampage, and tried to have my neighbors zoned out of business. I can't recall the last time I wrote an email b!tching at the city for not tearing historic houses down fast enough. The same houses I'm supposed to be protecting.

But yeah...somehow...it's us on this forum who are standing in the way of Springfield's progress. LMFAO!

Proof's in the pudding, during the decade SPAR's been around in its current form/leadership, 1/3 of the neighborhood has been turned into rubble. Why get upset at the people who just point out the obvious flaws in this organization?

You are totally mis-characterizing the situation.

The vast majority of SRGs lots were purchased 8-10 years ago, well before a relationship had ever occurred with SPAR. Since then, right or wrong, SRGs main push was not to expand its foot hold or grow its market, but to make the neighborhood safer, and cleaner for the people who had bought, and were going to buy their homes. (Those BASTARDS!)

I know of exactly two properties that were demolished at SRGs urging, and they were owned by the SRG! If there are others, I am not aware of them. I would also be surprised if they have bought more than a handful of properties since their initial flurry back in the 2000-2001 range.

Also, the 1/3 speculation is asinine. There have been demolitions, far too many of them, but 1/3 is a gross exaggeration.

Dan, drive around and just start counting up all the vacant lots one day. You'll lose track after 10 minutes. No joke.

Chris, all of the vacant lots in Springfield don't belong to SRG..

Quote from: stephendare on November 02, 2009, 12:25:28 PM
Well that is incorrect.

Before you moved into the neighborhood, I was at the Springfield Roundtable in 00.

SRG has always had a relationship with SPAR

While that is probably true, the depth of the relationship, particularly, the financial portions of it, weren't until later when the crime fund was started (remember that big jump in financing you all pointed at as some nefarious plot), the litter patrol, and many other things.

"I can't recall the last time I cashed a check from a developer who buys the vacant lots where the historic houses I'm lobbying the city for fast-track demos of used to stand."

- if you don't think there could be perceived conflicts of interest i RAP, you're nuts.

"I can't recall the last time I tried to ban one of my neighbors from public meeting. I can't recall the last time I went on a rampage, and tried to have my neighbors zoned out of business."

- this is pertaining to the same issue. what "rampage" are you referring? (ha). perhaps if most of the rehab/boarding houses were in your 1x1 neighborhood (with more possibly on the way), exploiting a loophole, then you'd see it differently. Since you don't have this issue, you can't speak to it. Well, you can....but not with legitamacy.

"I can't recall the last time I wrote an email b!tching at the city for not tearing historic houses down fast enough."

-  At least 2 people who have knowledge of the issue posted about it, explaining the backstory. Re-read them.

"But yeah...somehow...it's us on this forum who are standing in the way of Springfield's progress. LMFAO!"

- actually, Chris, if you care to tally, there are 4 or 5 people who have posted regularly share most of your same views, including yourself. far more as to the "otherside" aka SPAR may have some flaws, but is by far the most positive organization in the community and deserves to be supported.

your progress comment is a joke. if you are referring to the "progress" of additional boarding/rehab houses...yes.

Quote from: stephendare on November 02, 2009, 12:34:46 PM
So we agree.  There was already a relationship.

One in which we enabled SRG to obtain the land at very low cost.

How did you enable that?

Stephen sees things is his own "special" way. He can figure out how to twist and contort anything to his agenda, no matter how far he wanders off the ranch, persay.

It's like trying to talk with the Mad Hatter, when it comes to this issue.

stephen, was the bargain low prices not available to anyone else other than SPAR or SRG? I wasn't in the market at that point in time, however I've spoken with many, including my neighbor and they all bought very low in that time period.

I want to point out that I am not a member of SPAR and really do not follow what it is they do or plan to do so I do not currently have an opinion either way on the organization.

Tom Purdie bought the lots for SRG in 2000/2001, (he beat me to the punch on one that was up for taxes) at that time it was Rita and Jim O'Steen at SPAR.  The round table was HSCC so if there was a relationship it would have been with that organization.

Yes FSu they were available.  Many on which taxes were owed were listed downtown, that is how I found out that I had just lost out on the lot I wanted next to a house I had bought.  As soon as I came into the neighborhood in 2000 I went to meetings of all the organizations, I do not remember any such discussions on the buying of lots and I may just go look at the minutes, they were kept when the organizations merged. It would take a lot of digging though and I know what the answer would be. I did finish up as secretary to HScc when Adam became president and strider vice president so I do know a little about the subjecy) Tom Purdie ( I know he is Mack's cousin) did his buying quietly, for which I do not blame him, the prices would have risen quickly. He did buy some houses also but then stayed away from them, the two green ones - I think at 5th and Pearl - were his at one time - he asked me if I wanted them.  I followed his tracks a little.
Incidently in 2000 lots were going for a song, one went to a friend of mine for $500, a house with a huge lot for $4500, anyone doing research and acting quietly could easily get lots, without  having to "payout" as is being alledged) people did not want them and is some cases gave them away or donated themto the non-profits.  After the new houses started being built and sold, then SRG bought land at fair market value, ie what people asked, they even offered $80,000 for one on Market.   

Chris, lets not forget the Symphony lots at 4th and Silver, which were bought at a huge sum as well.

Quote from: soxfan on November 02, 2009, 12:18:14 PM
Chris, all of the vacant lots in Springfield don't belong to SRG..

Not all of them, that's true.

But a pretty big chunk of properties that COJ code-enforcement used to just board up and take a hands-off approach with, since they knew they were historical, 'somehow' seemed to start getting demolished all of a sudden, only for the vacant lots to wind up on SRG's roster. After reading Louise's own e-mails, where she's whining about how she isn't allowed to knock them down fast enough, I certainly have a strong suspicion of why.

Check out the property appraiser's records, they own hundreds, almost all of them vacant thanks in no small part to SPAR's non-efforts when it comes to preservation. Awhile back someone did the math on this, but IIRC it was sheclown, so I'm sure she'll just be automatically dismissed and devalidated like usual. But the final figure was that SRG's vacant lots by themselves amount to something like 8% of the ENTIRE SPRINGFIELD PLAT.

And obviously there are more vacant lots that SRG doesn't own, so no, I really don't think the 1/3 figure I threw out there is probably very far off at all.

Tell you what Chris. Since there is such a clear and obvious pattern, can you give a few addresses as an example?

Sheclown has the specifics on this one. She already did this homework, so I'll let her chime in.

Good. I await the evidence.

You know by saying that a round table meeting in 2000 shows that SRG had a relationship, is actually accusing Phil and Joe.
I just know when doing the fountain, I thought we thought that we may not mke the money needed.  We were selling bricks like crazy.  Then out of the blue Mack walked into the club and wrote us a check for $10,000.  I was gobsmacked it was his own initiative we did not ask for it.  We certainly were not involved in aiding the purchase of lots!
I believe the reason the police fund and other such funds went through SPAR was to allow them to be tax deductible and so encourage people to donate.  There was nothing untoward.  I will tell you I did not donate since I was fearful of liability, but need not have been actually.  I also was not a member of SPAR for a while but now I am really trying to fund raise.  The organization is nessessary and what is happening right now is unnessessary and as was said in the McCarthy hearings " where is the sense of decency" (I know I have paraphrased this).  The name calling is terrible, LOLAS is funny actually, but if acronyms (correct word?, I am not too bright) were used for other sexes, backgrounds or race the world would fall apart.

Quote from: chris farley on November 02, 2009, 12:59:12 PM
Yes FSu they were available.  Many on which taxes were owed were listed downtown, that is how I found out that I had just lost out on the lot I wanted next to a house I had bought.  As soon as I came into the neighborhood in 2000 I went to meetings of all the organizations, I do not remember any such discussions on the buying of lots and I may just go look at the minutes, they were kept when the organizations merged. It would take a lot of digging though and I know what the answer would be. I did finish up as secretary to HScc when Adam became president and strider vice president so I do know a little about the subjecy) Tom Purdie ( I know he is Mack's cousin) did his buying quietly, for which I do not blame him, the prices would have risen quickly. He did buy some houses also but then stayed away from them, the two green ones - I think at 5th and Pearl - were his at one time - he asked me if I wanted them.  I followed his tracks a little.
Incidently in 2000 lots were going for a song, one went to a friend of mine for $500, a house with a huge lot for $4500, anyone doing research and acting quietly could easily get lots, without  having to "payout" as is being alledged) people did not want them and is some cases gave them away or donated themto the non-profits.  After the new houses started being built and sold, then SRG bought land at fair market value, ie what people asked, they even offered $80,000 for one on Market.   

Yeah there were deals to be had, but I'm not sure if the quantity and frequency that you'd happen to stumble across a vacant lot for $500 would be anywhere close to what's needed to feed a large development business. With all that said SRG was a pretty well funded group, I'm sure they could have bought whatever properties they wanted. What I think reeks here isn't them 'stealing' land, I don't necessarily think they did that.

But did they butter up Louise in order to make it easier for them to demolish places? Well, read the e-mails, and you be the judge. I'll let Louise speak for herself on that one. The answer is pretty clear.

Quote from: chris farley on November 02, 2009, 01:39:19 PM
You know by saying that a round table meeting in 2000 shows that SRG had a relationship, is actually accusing Phil and Joe.
I just know when doing the fountain, I thought we thought that we may not mke the money needed.  We were selling bricks like crazy.  Then out of the blue Mack walked into the club and wrote us a check for $10,000.  I was gobsmacked it was his own initiative we did not ask for it.  We certainly were not involved in aiding the purchase of lots!
I believe the reason the police fund and other such funds went through SPAR was to allow them to be tax deductible and so encourage people to donate.  There was nothing untoward.  I will tell you I did not donate since I was fearful of liability, but need not have been actually.  I also was not a member of SPAR for a while but now I am really trying to fund raise.  The organization is nessessary and what is happening right now is unnessessary and as was said in the McCarthy hearings " where is the sense of decency" (I know I have paraphrased this).  The name calling is terrible, LOLAS if funny actually, but if acronyms were used for other sexes, backgrounds or race the world would fall apart.

I don't really think SPAR was involved in helping get the SRG properties. But I DEFINITELY think SPAR was HIGHLY involved in making it a whole lot easier to knock stuff down, which greatly benefitted SRG. That's the part I think reeks about all this. Louise's letter about how she has "always" valued historic preservation is just B.S., contrast that to her emails where she's kvetching to COJ about not being able to knock 'em down fast enough.

in the 2000 time frame, when the vast majority of the lots were bought, Louise wasnt the President or ED.

What I still dont understand, Chris, you have shown a clear disdain for Springfield in general. Why do you care so much? You dont live here, you dont own here, you dont seem to have any interests here what so ever, and make a point of telling those of us who DO, that we are dumb for doing so.

So what am I missing?

Quote from: Dan B on November 02, 2009, 01:45:59 PM
What I still dont understand, Chris, you have shown a clear disdain for Springfield in general. Why do you care so much? You dont live here, you dont own here, you dont seem to have any interests here what so ever, and make a point of telling those of us who DO, that we are dumb for doing so.

So what am I missing?

I have never said anyone is dumb for living in Springfield. I saw, and continue to see, its potential and I did put my money where my mouth is. Quit making useless ad hominem attacks, none of that is the point. The point here is SPAR, not Springfield. The two aren't one and the same.

I know this is not the subject matter of this thread, but some of the people involved are MetroJax in effect - who is on the board.  Is the entire board thinking the same way as most of these posts?

Quote from: ChriswUfGator on November 02, 2009, 01:48:37 PM

Quote from: Dan B on November 02, 2009, 01:45:59 PM
What I still dont understand, Chris, you have shown a clear disdain for Springfield in general. Why do you care so much? You dont live here, you dont own here, you dont seem to have any interests here what so ever, and make a point of telling those of us who DO, that we are dumb for doing so.

So what am I missing?

I have never said anyone is dumb for living in Springfield. I saw, and continue to see, its potential and I did put my money where my mouth is. Quit making useless ad hominem attacks, none of that is the point. The point here is SPAR, not Springfield. The two aren't one and the same.

You have made many a snide remark about Springfield in general. This is not ad hominem, this is fact.

Quote from: Dan B on November 02, 2009, 01:43:42 PM
in the 2000 time frame, when the vast majority of the lots were bought, Louise wasnt the President or ED.

Read my post before this one, I think you may not have had a chance to read it since you were probably still writing your post when I posted.

I don't think SPAR helped get SRG the lots. But I do think, based on Louise's own emails, that she was running around behind the scenes to make it easier to knock places down, which directly benefits SRG and other developers.

For chrissakes' you've got the ED of the Historical Preservation organization running around kvetching to COJ that having to do a structural survey to determine whether a place can be saved before knocking it down is somehow terrible and a waste of time, because it slows down the demolition process. WTF, man? Attack me all you want, I didn't write that e-mail. I never WOULD have written that e-mail, and I don't even work for a historic preservation group!

Chris. You don't know what you're talking about. Plain & simple. And you search, reach, and stretch for anything to latch on to.

As Dan stated, please present....anything...ANYTHING....besides your "hunch" (ha).

You have nothing, you will always have nothing, besides your hunch.

The hunch of someone who doesn't live here, doesn't partcipate in the organization in question, and generally doesn't know what is going on here.

But he does have a hunch!*

(* based on an email with no context or backstory)

Quote from: Dan B on November 02, 2009, 01:52:53 PM

Quote from: ChriswUfGator on November 02, 2009, 01:48:37 PM

Quote from: Dan B on November 02, 2009, 01:45:59 PM
What I still dont understand, Chris, you have shown a clear disdain for Springfield in general. Why do you care so much? You dont live here, you dont own here, you dont seem to have any interests here what so ever, and make a point of telling those of us who DO, that we are dumb for doing so.

So what am I missing?

I have never said anyone is dumb for living in Springfield. I saw, and continue to see, its potential and I did put my money where my mouth is. Quit making useless ad hominem attacks, none of that is the point. The point here is SPAR, not Springfield. The two aren't one and the same.

You have made many a snide remark about Springfield in general. This is not ad hominem, this is fact.

WTF does anything you're saying have to do with Louise's e-mails, exactly?

You need to look up the definition of ad hominem...

How am I attacking you? By interacting with you, albeit somewhat pointedly on a local forum?

Jesus man, stop being such a sensitive soul. If I were calling your employer demanding to know if they supported your stances on things, or sending you shitty little private messages, telling you how dumb you are, then perhaps you can call me out for attacking you.

As an aside, Im not taking exception with you on the demolition issue. I agree, there have been too many, and SPAR needs to reestablish itself as a preservation organization. I even agree that the organization has gotten to focused on the revitalization at the expense of the preservation. That said, painting it as some big conspiracy of kickbacks, and back room deals is far fetched, and sensationalistic. I expect that from your mentor, or someone trying to stir things up, not sure why your doing it though.

Quote from: fsu813 on November 02, 2009, 01:55:37 PM
Chris. You don't know what you're talking about. Plain & simple. And you search, reach, and stretch for anything to latch on to.

As Dan stated, please present....anything...ANYTHING....besides your "hunch" (ha).

You have nothing, you will always have nothing, besides your hunch.

The hunch of someone who doesn't live here, doesn't partcipate in the organization in question, and generally doesn't know what is going on here.

But he does have a hunch!*

(* based on an email with no context or backstory)

Understatement of the year! I love that Louise's e-mails are now just a "hunch". LMFAO

Just out of curiosity, what would you call a smoking gun laying next to a dead body then? A 'suggestion'? A 'hint'? LOL

Quote from: chris farley on November 02, 2009, 01:50:09 PM
I know this is not the subject matter of this thread, but some of the people involved are MetroJax in effect - who is on the board.  Is the entire board thinking the same way as most of these posts?

This was brought up over the weekend, but the thread has since been removed. Not that I am part of Metrojacksonville or speak for them, but the forum is a place provided my Metrojacksonville to allow people to communicate. It is not their outlet for presenting things as a whole. The individual postings in the forum are just that, individual postings.

Quote from: Dan B on November 02, 2009, 01:58:37 PM
How am I attacking you? By interacting with you, albeit somewhat pointedly on a local forum?

Jesus man, stop being such a sensitive soul. If I were calling your employer demanding to know if they supported your stances on things, or sending you shitty little private messages, telling you how dumb you are, then perhaps you can call me out for attacking you.

As an aside, Im not taking exception with you on the demolition issue. I agree, there have been too many, and SPAR needs to reestablish itself as a preservation organization. I even agree that the organization has gotten to focused on the revitalization at the expense of the preservation. That said, painting it as some big conspiracy of kickbacks, and back room deals is far fetched, and sensationalistic. I expect that from your mentor, or someone trying to stir things up, not sure why your doing it though.

The last thing I am is sensitive. You and I just don't get real far because you keep resorting to the same tactic, trying to divert attention away from the issue and onto anything that sounds catchy enough to move the argument to a place you think you have firmer footing.

In this situation, attacking me is a whole lot easier than actually trying to explain WTF the Executive Director of SPAR is doing when she got caught running around behind the scenes making it easy to knock down historic houses, and complaining to COJ about how their preservation policies don't let her knock them down fast enough for her liking.

You can dislike me all you want, but come on...SPAR got caught with its hand in the cookie jar. The only half-a$$ed defense anyone has been able to muster is FSU's claim that the emails are "taken out of context". Yeah, I love that logic. So those Watergate tapes are just 'out of context', and Eliot Spitzer's hooker was just 'out of context'. I mean, I gotta give him credit, he's the only one that even tried. But it still doesn't wash. Some things speak for themselves, and this is one of them.

At the end of the day the reason I'm here, and the reason I care, is that I'm utterly !@#$%&* horrified at those e-mails, and it is obvious (to me, at least) that if someone doesn't either get rid of this organization or its leadership, then before long there's not going to be much left to preserve.

I think over the past couple of weeks, we've had a good indication that conversations are tough to have on a forum. We have one accusation almost sorted out when the conversation/finger pointing then shift again... Which, regarding Louise's email, has been discussed in like 12 threads now. I don't think the answer to your questions can be answered here regarding the email unless Louise responds and then it probably won't be accepted. I think we all agree we do not have the entire story, regardless of how damning the email sounded or how some of you perceive past instances are answered by that email.

"I think we all agree we do not have the entire story....."


yes, and some lean towards the worst, most devious, most sensational possible explanation...............while others lean towards a more realistic, common sense explanation.

I think we're going to have to get Ennis in here again. Clean up on aisle 4!