SPAR revolt?

[JaxByDefault]

Thanks for the comments, Triclops. Do not worry; it goes without saying that your opinion is 100% valid. 

I am very glad to see SPAR and the neighborhood supporting your businesses. Shantytown indeed serves as central gathering place for several current and former SPAR board members. I know your places appear on my bank statements pretty regularly.

A long while ago, Mack asked the "young professional" set what they wanted to see in SPR, given the parameters of what would work in the neighborhood right now. I give him credit for cornering most of us at one time or another, at some neighborhood event, and asking us questions. He listened to stories of student loan debt that handicapped house buying power, places like the Pearl and Shanty drawing crowds of people into the neighborhood at night, rents in Five Points going up and driving beloved local places out of business--places that would be drawn to Springfield with fair commercial rent. Many noted moving here because of the proximity to downtown and the diversity of the community. I made a special point of thanking him for working out an arrangement for the Darty property with you all. I thought it represented a huge leap forward in thinking about successful local businesses and Main St. properties.

Most of us are willing to give credit where it is due, be it to a person or an organization. However, past accomplishments and do not mitigate the fact that some very real issues still exist here.

All of the criticisms and critics here cannot be painted with one brush. Some want a clean state with leadership; others want more responsive leadership. Personally, there are several board members who I think are a good fit for the job. I would advocate a shift in focus and a minor reorganization.

This thread has put several issues on the table, I hope they are heartily discussed throughout Springfield. Hopefully, open and issues-driven discussion can help form a more cohesive, more urban planning savvy, and more vibrant neighborhood.

[jbm32206]

And that's exactly what most of us want...and the first step is to have open and solution driven communication.

[JaxByDefault]

Jbm32206 has upped the challenge to

solution driven communication

.

I like it. And I will now co-opt it.

[RiversideGator]

I guess now that van Horne has left the scene we only have SPAR to blame for the failings of the neighborhood or even of certain individuals.   

[RiversideGator]

No one is blaming SPAR for lack of progress?  Ok.  Perhaps I misread the multiple posts which blamed SPAR for not providing services and not helping the neighborhood enough.   

[AlexS]

SPAR developed a strategic plan this year in May. I have started posting some details about it here:
http://www.sparcouncil.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=4129

I personally think that a 2 hour SPAR board meeting once a month does not provide enough time to cover all the complex issues at hand.

I believe the SPAR board should better utilize modern technology like the forum board and email more. The way I could envision things to work is the following:

SPAR general meeting, forum board and email can be utilized to gather pressing issues from the membership and stay in touch. Issues are catgorized, prioritized and assigned to sub committees.

Subcommittees consisting of one or more SPAR board members, SPAR members and volunteer subject matter experts discuss potential solutions and recommendations for the issues presented.

The outcome of the subcommittees is then taken back to the stakeholders for comments. Ultimately the SPAR board selects the best solution from the subcommittee and takes it forward as SPAR recommendation to e.g. City departments, JSO, JEA, ...

[jbm32206]

Alexs, this is exactly what I've been trying to say is needed, and you've nailed it...

[JaxByDefault]

Thanks, AlexS. Your responses and actions today are sincerely appreciated.

I would love to see the whole of this strategic plan when it is available for members. As of now, the information is rather vague.

I am especially interested in seeing what benchmarks are set for the measurable targets within the stated categories of "restore, revitalize, engage residents, lead the Organization."

I am also saddened by the lack of rail transit and downtown connectivity as a "Wild Successes" goals.

[AlexS]

I would love to see the whole of this strategic plan when it is available for members. As of now, the information is rather vague.

Please check again. I have added the details.

[strider]

There have been a lot of very good posts here.  Hopefully this type of dialog can continue.  Since others have mentioned Mack by name, so will I.  Mack has his own ideas about things and if you are on his good list, good for you, if not, watch your back.  That’s OK and I actually like Mack.  His vision for Springfield as I came to know it is not what is - at least as I see it - what is best for Springfield in the long term.  But people can and do disagree on things all the time.  Just SOP, as I see it.

What should not be tolerated is the handling over of control of an community organization to a select few so they can insure their future profits.  And that is, I’m afraid, is what has happened with SPAR Council.

quote Stephendare: - and to comment on a few things….

The set of problems described in this thread are EXACTLY why the neighborhood split into two groups for over 10 years. SPAR was deprived of city monies and became a loose cannon of occasional effectiveness that tried for a decade to overcome a property giveaway and financing debacle that drove many of the early pioneers out of the neighborhood. - Pretty much the way I was told it was.

Historic Springfield Community Council was formed by Phil Neary to do the actual hard work (that is no longer being done btw) of restoring the neighborhood. Phil Neary did not form HSCC - it was actually a result of the primary study used to create the historic district and make up the guidelines and overlay.  And yes, Phil Neary (and Lisa for that matter) did more for this community than most realize.  Also, Phil, with all his “power”, actually still recognized that he “worked at the discretion of the board, who in turn, knew that they worked for the community as a whole.

At the beginning of this decade, powered by involvement by many in the arts community and the backing of the developers and a generally positive vibe, SPAR began to resurge. Seems like this is pretty accurate.

A few years ago, SPAR and HSCC decided to stop being at cross purposes and merge. This was actually in response to two things.  First, SPAR was trying to talk to the city again and the city said they would be happier if Springfield spoke from one organization and, and this is the real biggy , Phil Neary was ready to step down and move on.  Not to detract from Pam, but Phil was so entrenched that it was hard to replace him. Pam also had it hard as an ED for the new organization for many,  many reasons, none of which were her doing.

The city would condone the merger only under the requirement that the democratic institutions of HSCC (widespread neighborhood involvement and buy in and representation from all four of the arbitrary 'quadrants', an accounting process, and accountability to the members) was instituted. This was actually a requirement for the organization to receive it’s substantial grant every year.  Nothing more. Which it gave up a year or two earlier than it would have dried up on it’s own?

After months of negotiation the two organizations merged and seemed to be honestly trying to retain the best qualities of both. (positive vibe and energy from the new SPAR group and actual organization and accountability from HSCC), but it seems as though that has failed.  Actually, not true.  The organization was sort of “ruled by an iron hand“- the same hand that rules it today - from the first meeting on.  Why I left.


One of the best things I have heard from this latest discussion is that AlexS is on the board.  If he doesn’t get beaten down first, he is one who can help get the changes needed in and enforced. 

[AlexS]

4. Push for Connectivity 

Why promote Springfield and Downtown as isolated islands?  If you combine their assets and promote them together, they pack a powerful punch.  This will also make it much easier to take advantage of the traffic traveling down State and Union.  Most see this area as no man's land, but considering those streets carry as much traffic as our suburban highways, they should be filled with a ton of retail serving the entire inner city.  Also, don't forget about the parks lining Hogans Creek.  The urban core was at its best when that park system was viewed as Jacksonville's Central Park.  Btw, the same goes for the neighborhoods to the north.  Some joint redevelopment efforts between Metro North and Springfield would also be beneficial to both communities.  Last, but not least, Springfield residents should really rally around bringing a commuter rail line to the S-Line.  Connecting this neighborhood with the rest of the city by rail will do more for this community then anything currently being pursued.

Does Downtown or Metro North have a neighborhood organization comparable to SPAR ? Who would SPAR best discuss such alliances with ?

[thelakelander]

DVI and the JEDC for downtown and Metro North for Metro North.  Btw, Metro North has a representative who attends all the SAMBA general monthly meetings.

Metro North Community Development Corporation
Ronald Pauline, executive director
3105 N. Main St.
(904) 358-1224

Downtown Vision, Inc.
Terry Lorince, executive director
214 N. Hogan Street, Suite 120
(904) 634-0303

Jacksonville Economic Development Council (JEDC)
Ron Barton, Executive Director
1 West Adams Street, Suite 200
(904) 630-1858

[strider]

Stephendare - to illustrate what I meant by the "iron Hand" comment:  When the by-laws were re-written for the merger, the number of board members was reduced from the old HSCC days.  By the way, HSCC had specific positions just for renters and "absentee" business owners as well as dividing it up into the four quadrants. Four board positions were "reserved" - not to be used at first.  The idea was that these positions could be used for things like getting an accountant on the board, or perhaps someone from the churches - whatever the future may indicate was needed.  Initially, they were to be appointed by a board vote. At the first meeting Louise just announce the four new board members she appointed.  I took her aside and told her that was against the by-laws and she did not have the authority to do that.  She was very nice about it and said she didn't realize that (Yeah, right!) and that it would be done properly.  We had a retreat a couple of weeks later.  The four "appointees" were there - even though it was for board members only - and a "vote" was held there to make it all "legal".  Anyone care to guess who (other than Louise) the four were very friendly with? 

Shortly after that, SRG people came in with the "security fund" idea.  I was against it as I still do not believe that an organization such as SPAR Council should be the the security business.  It strikes me as against the mission of such an organization.  I also still wonder why and what business or tax benefit there was to running the security for their projects through SPAR Council, a non-profit.  There must be one or else why would the do it?  And believe me, at the time, it was obvious that was all it was - making the cost of their security a donation to a non-profit organization.

I was pretty much treated the way many of the more current board members have stated.  Kept out of the real decision making and used only when needed.  You would go to a board meeting, have a discussion and it would be very apparent that the outcome of the vote was decided long before.  And, some time ago, the original by-laws were changed to give Louise the power to appoint who she wanted to the board.  I have not read the latest by-laws so I don't know whether that has been changed again or not. 

More recently, in conversations with a board president,  I was promised one thing from him and Louise basically told me they weren't doing it.  I realized what she meant was: she didn't agree to it, and it made no difference what the president or other board members said.  Sorry, but in most organizations, the board and it's chairman or president has more say about policy than a "hired" Executive Director.  All of this sort sounds like an "iron hand" at work to me. 

SRG as a developer should not have as much influence as it does over a community organization that is supposed to represent all of the residents, regardless of their social-economic status.  SRG's position for the community is one that is a "broken window" policy.  If a building has one broken window, someone will come along and break more.  Keep the building's windows all nice and pretty and no one will break any of them.  Sounds harmless enough.  In fact, it is a common policy and has some merit when actually applied to buildings.  However, SRG's management and SPAR Council seem to apply it to people.  Those they consider undesirable, whether they be people or businesses, become the broken window and to fix it, you simple get them out of the community.  If you don't, more of the undesirables will come, if you get rid of them, then the "building" will be pretty again.

Of course, we want the crime gone.  Of course we want the criminals some where else.  But lets be real about who they are and lets support the people that have been the real supporters of the business on Main Street and not try to get rid of them because they do not meet someone's standard of income or social status.  I think that once the real demographics are accepted, real progress can be made on the commercial corridor.  Still, look at Metro North as the leader here.  Not SPAR Council.  Not unless radical changes are made in it's "management".

Sorry - I found my soap box a bit.  Hope I at least answered your question.

[zoo]

SRG's position for the community is one that is a "broken window" policy.  If a building has one broken window, someone will come along and break more.  Keep the building's windows all nice and pretty and no one will break any of them.  Sounds harmless enough.  In fact, it is a common policy and has some merit when actually applied to buildings.

With all the talk back and forth, I went and asked Mack about his "broken window" theory. He had this to say (not verbatim, but close, so I have taken the liberty of using quotes)...

"Who doesn't want to live in an area that's clean?!? Broken window theory is not my theory. It has been studied nationwide, even worldwide, by sociologists, scholars, and institutions and people who are way smarter than me. Please post this description of broken window theory from Henry Cisneros, former secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on my behalf."

-------------------
This explanation of the "broken window" theory was written by Henry G. Cisneros when he was Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. It was published in a series of essays titled "Defensible Space: Deterring Crime and Building Community" - January 1995.

James Q. Wilson and George Kelling developed the `broken windows' thesis to explain the signaling function of neighborhood characteristics. This thesis suggests that the following sequence of events can be expected in deteriorating neighborhoods. Evidence of decay (accumulated trash, broken windows, deteriorated building exteriors) remains in the neighborhood for a reasonably long period of time. People who live and work in the area feel more vulnerable and begin to withdraw. They become less willing to intervene to maintain public order (for example, to attempt to break up groups of rowdy teens loitering on street corners) or to address physical signs of deterioration.

Sensing this, teens and other possible offenders become bolder and intensify their harassment and vandalism. Residents become yet more fearful and withdraw further from community involvement and upkeep. This atmosphere then attracts offenders from outside the area, who sense that it has become a vulnerable and less risky site for crime. The "broken window" theory suggests that neighborhood order strategies such as those listed below help to deter and reduce crime.

- Quick replacement of broken windows
- Prompt removal of abandoned vehicles
- Fast clean up of illegally dumped items, litter and spilled garbage
- Quick paint out of graffiti
- Finding (or building) better places for teens to gather than street corners
- Fresh paint on buildings
- Clean sidewalks and street gutters
--------------------

"Doing these things doesn't just make Historic Springfield a better place for SRG (remember I live in the community with my family, so it's important to me as a resident). It makes it a better place for ALL area residents."

[sheclown]

right...and Bagrin agrees it is has merit for buildings, but not for people.