Hanging Chad on Christopher St.
To The Editor:
I read the recent letter (“Crime stats and Christopher St.,” Jan. 28) by Chad Marlow, as he adds his voice to the cacophony of sound on Christopher St. It reads like a Grisham novel, with chills over accusations of the “high level of crime” on Christopher St., drama over accusations that the Sixth Precinct is misleading the public with crime statistics and a little comic relief when the writer admits to living there “for several months.”
I am sure that the precinct can tell Mr. Marlow that neighborhood complaints dropped from 8,112 in 2002 to 7,382 in 2003, a nine percent drop. I am sure the police and the mayor could tell us that crime in New York is at record lows, that with large reductions in police presence in the Village, nothing like this has been seen in decades. I am sure that Dave Poster and his patrol can tell Chad that the hated Two Potato is gone forever, to be replaced by a family-friendly Italian cafe. Why, I can tell Chad that Christopher St. is patrolled by the Sixth Precinct, the Dave Poster Patrol, Port Authority police at the PATH entrance and the PEP forces in the Hudson River Park. Surely, all those folks can tell criminals from loud, noisy young people?
I can also tell Chad that there is no prostitution on Christopher St., and that the Bleecker St./Seventh Ave. area is a much larger problem because of all the bars there, and that the young people on Christopher St. are too young for the bars. I can tell Chad that he should have been here in the ’60s and ’70s during the heroin epidemic or during the crack epidemic of the ’90s. Those were real times of crisis. I can tell Chad that the people who complain about this area will not be happy until the “outsider element” is gone from Christopher St. for good.
Chad can tell me that real estate values on Christopher St. have never been higher, and once the Hudson River Park Trust adds all the new family-friendly items in the Hudson River Park, the real estate will be even more valuable.
I can remind Chad that when a young lesbian woman named Sakia Gunn left the Village one night in May 2003, and returned home, she encountered homophobia and was killed, showing us all what a beacon this area was. The older members of Village Independent Democrats can tell Chad when fighting racism was part of the mission of that group.
Finally, I can ask whether there is an epidemic of older residents being mugged, robbed and harassed by young people of color who use the streets late at night? Is this about crime or quality of life? Is this about crime or noise? Is it about crime or overflowing garbage cans? Is this about crime or blocking sidewalks?
And finally, those people who have been complaining for years about “outsiders” hanging around — what are they actually going to do to make Christopher St. and Greenwich Village better for everyone?
Melissa Sklarz
Sklarz is a member, Community Board 2
Village View board is secretive
To the Editor:
I found your Jan. 28 article (“Some at Village View oppose renovation of lobbies”) informative. The co-op’s board acts very secretively. The monthly minutes they distribute to tenants provide little information about the board’s activities. The minutes we get are not timely: only last week did we get the minutes for their November meeting. They did not disclose anything about the controversial renovation projects, only a rehash of the results of the election of officers in early November (which had already been posted on the buildings’ bulletin boards over 10 weeks ago).
In your article, the board’s secretary, Robert La Valva, provided volumes of information about the lobby renovation compared to what has been previously provided to the shareholders. Mr. La Valva had comments about the tenant’s lawsuit, details about the ramps and cost. It’s unfortunate that the only time we get the board to speak up is when this issue becomes news in the press.
This is not the only matter, however, that the board has not discussed with the shareholders. A little research at the New York State Department of State Web site reveals that the board created a new corporation, Village View Senior Services, Ltd., over a year ago in January 2003. Have the shareholders been apprised of this? No. Do we know why a new corporation had to be established? No. This is typical of the way the board does not disclose important developments to the shareholders. After all, the establishment of a corporation requires debate, advice from counsel and a plan for its existence — all matters that should be made known to the tenants.
In October 2002, the board held an open shareholders’ meeting to discuss the new budget and accountant’s report. The attendees forced the board to discuss the lobby renovations (by continually bringing up this issue by asking questions). Mr. La Valva obviously would have preferred to not have any lobby renovation discussion, reminding the shareholders that the meeting agenda was only to cover the budget and accountant’s report.
The shareholders still have not seen any alternative lobby plans or the architect’s work proposal. Also, it is not clear to me if Village View, a co-op built in 1964, has to comply fully with A.D.A regulations. Village View has already taken some action by providing ramps for wheelchairs in the subject building. Mr. La Valva claims there is an issue about the ramps’ width not being adequate — do we really need a ramp that will allow for two lanes of wheelchair traffic?
In the end, Cooper Square Realty — the building manager — and the Village View board of directors are creating unnecessary and misguided renovations and undue expense that will ultimately jeopardize the financial underpinnings of the cooperative.
We must have absolute transparency on all actions taken by the board. If transparency cannot be obtained, incumbents should be voted out at the next 2004 election, along with Cooper Square Realty.
Paul R. Hellund
News media biased against news
To The Editor:
Re “People prefer their bias straight; more tune in BBC” (Talking Point, by Jeff Dufour, Jan. 28):
In his column on bias in the news media, Jeff Dufour was tilting at a windmill. As a viewer who has no interest in commentators or groups of commentators for 15 or 30 minutes or an hour, I listen to or view only so-called news programs on radio and TV. There exists, however, a major problem with these programs, namely that they give no news.
The fact that three workers were killed when a wall collapsed on them, that an elderly woman and her two grandchildren died in a fire, that a dog was electrocuted by stepping on a metal plate — these are not news. They are particularly irritating because they take the time that might better be given to real news, like the AIDS horror in southern and central Africa, the persistence of slavery in Sudan, the falling popularity of Tony Blair in England, the increasing power of gangsterism in Russia and the intriguing economic system in China, where capitalism is being encouraged in the framework of communism.
Nor do we get an insight into the news here in the U.S. How much attention was paid to the cowardice of the Congress in passing an $87 billion appropriation bill by a voice vote, so that we have no way of knowing who the cowards were?
Thus, one has to agree with Dufour that there is bias in the media of our country. The trouble is that the bias is against presenting news. I get more news from 30 minutes of “BBC World News” than I get from 24 hours of the typical “all-news” station.
The situation is really lamentable.
Stewart H. Benedict
Making nice after ‘Vice’ flap
To The Editor:
We are concerned that a piece that ran in Scoopy’s Notebook two weeks ago, entitled “Betty fires back,” left a wrong impression about the debate on a resolution Community Board 2 adopted that criticized those who sell “M” (mature)-rated games, such as “Grand Theft Auto: Vice City,” to children under age 18.
Both of us feel that components of the “Vice City” game are objectionable, and that children should never be permitted access to such adult-oriented games by merchants, their parents or anyone else. Unquestionably, at the top of the list of “Vice City”’s objectionable components are its references to violence against particular ethnic groups. These references are in bad taste and add nothing to the game other than prejudice.
In some respects, we are very different people. One of us (Chad) grew up in a Catholic and Jewish home, and has been made acutely aware of how those two religious/ethnic groups have, throughout history, been regularly denied their self-expression and faced almost unimaginable levels of prejudice and violence. The other of us (Betty) is a Quaker who raised three adolescent boys of Haitian decent and still experiences the visceral fear that came with seeing her boys go out into a world in which they were vulnerable just because they were in the black skins God gave them.
Despite our different backgrounds, we have much in common. Both of us feel passionately that racism is one of, if not the worst of, mankind’s evils. Racism should be condemned loudly whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head. To suggest that one of us feels less strongly on this point than the other is irresponsible and wrong. The debate over the game “Vice City” also raised issues concerning one of our most treasured rights: free speech.
When one infringes upon the free speech rights of another (especially when the infringer is a governmental entity), it creates a risky precedent. While the speech one might seek to ban today may be objectionable to all persons of good hearts and good minds, persons of good hearts and good minds do not always make the rules. In the hands of the wrong individual or government entity (e.g., John Ashcroft), a precedent for limiting free speech can be a very dangerous one indeed. To suggest that one of us feels less strongly on this point than the other is irresponsible and wrong.
The Scoopy’s piece referenced above seems to suggest that acrimony between the two of us developed during the course of the debate over the “Vice City” resolution. We both know how much The Villager loves to play up conflict, but the truth of the matter is that no such friction exists. It is always difficult when two deeply held principles — here, (1) that expressions of racism are deplorable and must be condemned, and (2) that free speech is a right that must be defended unwaveringly — seem to come into conflict with one another. Reasonable people can come down on either side of such a conflict, as the two of us did that night, without losing respect for the other person’s point of view.
There is one more belief we hold in common that is important to highlight here: we both believe that personality fights amongst our colleagues too often interfere with doing good for our fellow residents in our community. We are fortunate, in our case, to have worked together on housing and social service issues and learned to genuinely like and respect each other through that work. Together, we intend to continue to be a positive example of teamwork that we hope will produce great results for years to come.
Betty Williams
Chad Marlow
Williams and Marlow are members, Community Board 2
Prisoners have paid debts
To The Editor:
Re “Boudin and a kid from Brooklyn; striking parallels” (Talking Point, by Keith Crandell, Oct. 8, 2003):
In ancient times, specifically during the Roman Empire, paroled prisoners were required to carry and produce upon demand documents attesting to their status as free citizens. These documents were officially stamped “Paid in Full,” declaring that the bearer had indeed fully paid his or her debt to society as mandated by the law. All the rights and privileges afforded to legal citizens were to be fully restored.
In the interest of justice, there should be fair criminal justice policy when it comes to the issue of parole eligibility and its blatant abuses nationwide. Case in point, I was sentenced to a term of 15 years to life. To this date I have served a total of 21 years and have been denied parole on four separate occasions despite my excellent disciplinary record, educational accomplishments (associate’s, bachelor’s, master’s degrees), as well as numerous vocational and therapeutic programming while incarcerated.
It is my plea that parole-ready prisoners cease being used as political footballs and that careful consideration by parole commissioners be given to those who have constructively dedicated their time in prison so that they can become contributing members of our society upon their release.
Paul Satterfield
Satterfield is an inmate at Otisville (NY) Correctional Facility
