To dismiss the impact the know Bookstore has had on this community would be a travesty that business grew from just a bookstore to an institution.Some of the most accomplished historians in the world have lectured in that building,and I am not exagerating. From Dillard street to Fayetville street the Know has atracted intellectuals from all persuasions. If the goal is to improve the cultual awareness and the arts in this area of Durham the Know Bookstore should definately be in the equation. Myself personally have benifited greatly from the know, as a young college student in the 70's, there was no place in Durham that I could go t0o find sources that could doucument the greatness of the African contribution to world civilization. So many students of that era loved the Know. So take it from someone who have seen the rise in cultural and historicol awareness in that community, this awakening can be attributed largely to the Know insttution. I encourage all parties involved to redirect their efforts ,and concentrate on the very thing that been working for so long. Do not let history repeat itself again in terms of Aficans not being able to collectively own our own institutions. Save the Know!Thanks, Alex Gaddy
""It would be just too much for the developer to bear the entire cost of that," Cheek said."
Recall that the first legal incarnation of this developer made some $15 million buying the land cheap, then selling it high to a second legal incarnation of the developer. Any costs could easily be borne by the developer(s).
Hey, I've got an idea: Let the developers develop the land as initially zoned for 6% impervious surface, perhaps with a density incentive for low impact development, and the city spend the $1million on infrastructure upgrades within the urban core? That provides jobsjobsjobs and protects our water resources simultaneously.
If anyone would like to know one of the main reasons Falls and Jordan Lake are a foul mess of "fecal coliforms, E. coli and enterococci—bacteria that can make people sick"--- it might have something to do with the 44,000,000 gallons of toxic sewage sludge spread in the watershed of Falls Lake PER YEAR!!!, and the 100,000,000 gallons of toxic sewage sludge spread in the watershed of Jordan Lake PER YEAR!!! for more information and to see maps --go to www.sewagesludgeactionnetwork.com
Yeah it really does seem unfair. I think that in Durham, revitalization translates to re"white"ilization.
Everything about Revitalization in Durham seems to be for folks with lots of money. All the apartments and houses downtown are not in reach of most people including myself ( not that I would want to live urban) Take a look at most of the neighborhoods like Trinity Park. Who can afford the prices of that neighborhood. Start to do some scattered housing so everyone can afford a nice moderate home!
Many of these comments are misguided. I worked with Joe for a number of years and could paint a very accurate picture of Somerhill's daily operation and how it lead to its downfall.
The ironic thing is that it is not a residential neighborhood. It borders on one, but it is a post-industrial downtown area being turned into mixed-use.
Here is another newspaper story about Ian Kipp, this one written by the Rocky Mount Editorial Board:
"neoliberal capitalism privatizes, commercializes, and militarizes public space." -El Kilombo
Give me a break, who are these kooks?
Some clarification on " vivala's" understanding of who the "rather large group" is:
Old North Durham NA and Duke Park NA may be listed somewhere as supporters of the FONDP plan, but in fact, that support is actually just a majority vote at whatever poorly-attended neighborhood association meeting where the vote took place.
In Old North Durham's case, many if not most of the FONDP live there, but as neighborhood associations typically go, let's say ....10-15 people....would be a good guess and that's generous. Hard to say, as no one seems to be able to find any listing ANYWHERE of who the actual members of FONDP actually are. (And yet, The City of Durham Parks Department is in partnership with them....go figure.) In Duke Park's case, the matter was voted on three separate times as it was such a divisive and controversial issue. The last vote was 7-6, and that is out of only 13 voting members who attended the NA meeting. Before that, the vote was a 4-4 split by their BOD. So, don''t be swayed by "neighborhood" support. It is not what it appears. Very few people in the community are informed about the background and history of the park, including many of those who voted to support FONDP. The school building is, I believe, owned by Bob Chapman and his wife, and as the article states, they are also on the school's board and own another large piece of adjoining commercial property.
On the other hand, the public meetings...the first in particular, drew close to 140 sign-carrying supporters who want the park left with the soccer field at it's current size, although improved as per the City's plan of a few year's back. That is considerably greater than the actual number of people who came in support of FONDP at all three meetings combined. Unfortunately, the 140+ supporters, many if not most of whom, reside in the adjoining apartment communities (low-income housing, primarily Latino) and their allies do not have the same financial, political, and social connections that FONDP and CPSFC's Board members have.
Durham City Council...take note! There is a solution here somewhere that could actually be a "win-win." If the City needs financial help they should, by way of an entirely transparent process, seek a private partnership with some professional and well-vetted entity, that is capable of thinking "outside of the box" , is masterful with methods of true "participatory planning", and that does not have the same vested interest in the Park and surrounding buildings that CPSFC's Board members have. Such a partnership, if done properly could seek to embrace the families and community that reside there and currently use the park most , while at the same time, provide elements that other users would also enjoy. I am pretty sure that El Kilombo wants that as well. A "level playing field" in the figurative sense.
"Big capitalist conspiracy" are not El Kilombo's words, they are the presumptions of "mkj" above. Verbal bashing like this about this small organization is typical, has been going on far too long by people who really ought to know better, and is rarely based on anthing factual.
Old North Durham Park should obviously be a multi-use park that works for both the children of the school, and the soccer players. I don't know how feasible a community survey or vote is, but hopefully City Council will see that this is clearly what makes sense for the ENTIRE community of people who use the park.
The REAL tragedy here is that the city sold Erwin Field Park to Duke. It is absolutely criminal that a city would sell its people out in that way.
But the sale of Erwin Field park is not the fault of the school, and does not change the fact that it makes sense for the entire neighborhood community (which includes the school) to have a multi-use park.
I find the real irony here is that the language El Kilombo uses to disparage the school, that theses children and families are somehow outsiders coming in to take advantage of our scarce community resources, is the EXACT same language that constitutes much of the racist rhetoric used against Latino peoples.
Just sayin'. Try to be at least a little bit ideologically consistent people.
"Also, is there a rule that the only 'community' served by a park is the community within walking distance?"
Only if you live in Watts-Hillandale.
Also, is there a rule that the only 'community' served by a park is the community within walking distance? Does it matter if students and/or soccer players are driving in from other areas? Since Durham is largely an automobile-based community, I think it would be hard to argue that something is only a part of your community if you can walk to it. For example, I live out in the country and definitely consider 9th Street and Downtown to be my 'community.' So, this idea that the children at the school are not part of the community if they drive in (and by the way whoever said that they are 'bussed in' is totally incorrect) is just silly.
BUT, if we ARE going to define community that way, and say that a park only belongs to the neighborhood it is in, then we really should just survey that neighborhood and call it a day.
Why don't we just put it to a vote? Or an impartially conducted survey?
It sounds like everyone is guessing what this neighborhood wants, and the best thing to do would be to ask. Also, El Kilombo is angry that in the initial survey only interviewed 6 Latino residents, which implies that the survey was racist, but do we have stats on what percentage of the neighborhood is Latino? For all we know, Latino soccer players are coming in from other neighborhoods. It sounds like we need some accurate information here.
It also sounds like we have a small group of student activists and one soccer coach claiming that a vast majority of people want to use the field for league soccer, and a rather large group (including the School, the African American Dance Ensemble, Old North Durham Park and Duke Park neighborhood associations and El Centro) who want it to be developed into a lively community park. So... why don't we just put it to a neighborhood vote?
Easy peasy. Problem solved.
Additionally, the "private" in the public-private partnership that El Kilombo insinuates into something evil actually is the funds raised from the annual Strawberry festival, which is a community event organized with hundreds of labor hours contributed by the families at CPSC. The "private" is profit raised from the event -- in-kind donations, $1-$100 spent on food and activities by the families who attend; and so yes, the businesses who sponsor the event (Herald Sun, Whole Foods, etc) are part of the "private" as well. This is a wholesome endeavor, people! CPSC leveraged the funds raised from the event and matched it with county dollars (Durham Open Spaces & Trails Grant) to purchase the park equipment that was DONATED back to the city. (CPSC kids play on it during school hours -- but it is open to the public). I'm disgusted frankly by the way in which El Kilombo has co-opted the conversation and turned the park plan into some big capitalist conspiracy.
El Kilombo talks about "their community" which I find interesting. Central Park School for Children is "their community" -- it is three or fours doors down the street and is a public, charter school. (Yes, it's a charter so folks from all over the area can send their kids to school there but many families live within walking distance). They refuse to engage in conversation about the school's plan or needs b/c schools and kids are not what they're about. They prefer to hear themselves bloviate about the perceived injustice of the CPSC park plan. They have resorted to cheap attacks against a few individuals. They are fighting the gentrification battle in a completely misguided way. But they're purists -- don't want to sully themselves with dialogue or any kind of grounding in reality. They prefer to play act the role of marxist. Hilarious considering their organizers' voices were trained at Duke University not in Chiapas or Soweto.
@hopeandchange2012: Yeah, and that's not even the worst thing! After he left Yonkers he spent six years as BID manager for Rocky Mount and did such a bad job that they.... er, loved him??? http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/node/630…
Why wasn't Ms Keith-foust shouting about this article at her little press conference? And another thing, what was she even doing there anyway? Did she ever explain what she did with the 80k that was supposed to go to Kentington Heights?
While working as head of the Downtown Yonkers Management Association (DYMA), Ian Kipp, the only person publicly affiliated with Friends of Old North Durham Park, illegally appropriated approximately $29,000 from the DYMA and is "barred from serving in the future with any nonprofit or charitable groups operating in New York state."
For details see: http://yonkerstribune.typepad.com/yonkers_…
Blanks aren't completely safe—see Brandon Lee and Jon-Erik Hexum. However, for anyone not in immediate proximity to the gun, blank ammo would be a big improvement.
I wish they would just turn it into a "use blanks" campaign. Heck, market "celebratory rounds" at Wal-Mart.
Celebratory gunfire is a common phenomenon around the world. Stern lectures on it from the Police every year never seem to do any good. And using blanks instead of live ammo removes almost all of the danger.
Indy Week • 302 E. Pettigrew St., Suite 300, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation