Home / Blogs / Junad Rizki's blog / Is Crime a fact of life in Evanston as one council member would suggest?
Is Crime a fact of life in Evanston as one council member would suggest?
In the Roundtable ( July 3) the following statement was made by Alderperson Steve Bernstein “We’re not a suburb, we’re urban suburban. Crime is a fact of life here. We may not like it, but we have to live with it.”
This statement shows a public official, along with others on the city council who seem to not care if residents are continual attacked and hurt here by the criminal element who live in this community.
Alderperson Bernstein is not alone when it comes to having no desire to deal with the real issue of crime in this town. Over a year ago – the city held a meeting on Crime at Evanston Township High, hours before the meeting, an individual was gunned down in the street, not one public official in attendance bother to inform the public. All the police officers in attendance were not in uniform and did not participate in the group discussion they were only listening. (It was clear those in charge did not want them to speak) I found the entire affair to be typical of those in power here having a meeting with no real information available and bunch of uninformed people talking to one another.
Interestingly the Roundtable on July 3 also published an article about the “Safe Neighborhood program” called SNAP. The city has finally admitted we have slums in town which are crime infested. ( 1900 block of Jackson, 2100 block of Darrow and 100-300 Custer )
While public officials here want to approach the crime problem, with a new holistic manner. That is they will have a lot of city departments look at it, Crime will not be solved by cleaning a few alleys or fixing a broken bench in park. The real issue they do not want to address is how to reduce the criminal population in Evanston?
That is those that have dozen of arrests and convictions, who still live in this community and continue to commit crimes. It is very likely we have some individuals here that have several hundred arrests by the police. One of my sources total me a former police chief felt if he could rid Evanston of several hundred criminals crime in town would drop dramatically!
It is be my view for years the leaders have been supporters of the crime problem by their attitudes. The council members have continued to show their lack of support for the police and their belief that the police somehow are out of control when it comes to dealing with criminal population here.
Recently the council approved a citizen review board. During the discussion at committee I suggested those that file complaints against the police officers criminal backgrounds come into question. That is how many times they have been arrested and convicted of crimes here. My view is why should police officers be brought in front of a board with the potential to loose their job and reputation, when many of those involved in the complaints have extensive criminal backgrounds and violent behavior issues. The citizen supporters of the review board there were not too happy with my statements.
The council for years has duplicated the role of the public defenders office by providing criminal legal support for those involved in crime here. Hundred of thousands of dollars have been given in Evanston taxpayer money. Here again these council members seem to have no interest in protecting the public by their own personal political agendas.
The City for years has taken in millions of federal dollars in community block grant funds, with the intention of improving the so called “blighted” areas in town. Most of these funds have been misused for patronage and staff positions. There has not been any real effect in reducing crime here.
Although the official position of the police management is crime has dropped. Back in 1997 I pointed out at the city council we had a higher index crime rate than Chicago.
Several council members questioned me after I spoke. The truth could not be disputed.
Interestingly several week later the index crime rate for 1998, was published and crime went down 25%! While the police management at the time claimed community policing – the truth is on a national basis crime dropped since they changed the way crime was reported which they later mentioned in future reports.
In the roundtable article on SNAP it pointed to “sophisticated open air –drug market”: has been operating on the 1900 Jackson. What is new each year here the Evanston police department joins forces with other departments and does an extensive sting operation for drugs in target areas. This as been occurring here for years with no real results.
The issues of crime have penetrated the public institution here. In the last few years three janitors in District 65 the elementary district have been brought to justice for having drugs and a gun in our public schools. It is very clear the attitude of some in the community is to turn their back on these issues. When my children were at the high school they were even hearing rumors of some hourly staff members involved with selling drugs. I have been told by police officers they have had to interact with some city employees on criminal matters, and then they see them working at the city.
In closing there is a large price for crime here. Numerous citizen have been hurt by the criminal element our council members do not want to deal with in an effective manner.
Even time you read in the paper someone is robbed and knocked to the ground and beaten it sounds as if nothing happen. Not too long ago in Oak Park a man had the same thing happen to him and he died a few months later due to head injuries. A few year back a criminal in Evanston was targeting elderly victims in his street robberies one women end up in the hospital for over a month from his crime attack.
These continued robberies and attacks on citizens are not acceptable. What has been the response of council members. When NU students and others were being attacked down town they signed an agreement with NU to police our public streets since they felt they did not have the man power. Last year when groups of kids attacked people by the new theatres and scream racial slurs they spent TIF funds to increase police patrols.
Putting the burden on the police by adding more officers is not the answer. Interestingly all the so called TIFs they created were justified because the areas were blighted and had crime problems. What area of downtown Evanston had a real crime problem? Real no TIF the city created was in a blight crime infested area. The city just admitted the 1900 block of Jackson, 2100 block of Darrow and 100-300 Custer are blighted with extensive crime problems. Is there any chance they will redevelop these areas with a TIF?
Criminals and Council members are the problem here. Until the council wants to eliminate the criminal population from this community innocent citizens will continue to be the victims of their crimes.
"I agree with Anonymous that
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/17/2008 - 8:09pm.
I agree with Anonymous that drugs do not cause crime."
If anonymous agrees with anonymous, how do we know if anonymous didn't write anonymous's response. This might be taking this thread a bit off kilter but haven't we beat this dead horse into the ground?
Anonymous, both of you,
You write that drug prohibition is the CAUSE of crime? And your solution is to release all those in jail on drug-related charges? And then we all live happily ever after in a drug user society regardless if the drug is marijuana or LSD or angel dust. Ever seen anyone on angel dust?
I guess in your world anything goes. The drug culture has decimated millions of families in so many ways that's it's too much to mention here. Stats show that there is a clear link between drug use and crime. Do you think by legalizing drugs that, for one example, a user won't commit a burglary to get money for their next hit? Or should we have government programs to provide drugs to the poor and needy?
Anyone who suggests that drug prohibition causes crime is naive and full of it..
Anonymous Al
Well, Anonymous, everything that you say about banned substances can also be said about substances that are not only freely available but even celebrated in our culture. Ever see a drunk unable to put down the bottle? Or a smoker unable to quit? Or how about millions of obese people including, tragically, young children, addicted to sugar? The epidemic of cancers, heart disease and diabetes caused by these and many other socially acceptable substances is exponentially worse than anything caused by banned drugs. In fact, the national carnage caused by prescription drugs approved by the FDA and dispensed like candy by doctors dwarfs any health problems caused by banned drugs.
We all know about the explosion of organized crime when alcohol was banned. What do you think would happen if tobacco and sugar, especially sugar, were banned to protect the public? Violent criminal gangs adept at bribing and circumventing the law would be battling each other for market share to feed the public's addiction. Prices would skyrocket and children would be committing crimes to raise $10 for a black market can of soda from a street corner pusher. Police would be breaking into people's homes on anonymous tips that boxes of Snickers were hidden in the basement. Politicians would be outdoing each other proposing laws to protect us from the crystal scourge. And jails would be packed with criminals who dared to defy the busy bodies who know what's best for them.
The above scenario is clearly preposterous, but no more preposterous than was the prohibition of alcohol and the continuing prohibition of certain drugs. Addictions are clearly not fun and should be discouraged, but they are an unavoidable fact of human existence and must be dealt with as health problems and not as crimes.
How much of Evanston's real crime against persons and property is caused by addicts unable to afford the exorbitant black market prices for banned substances and how much is caused by addicts unable to afford legally available beer, cigarettes and soda? Legalizing drugs would clearly cause their prices to collapse and erase a major cause of crime and, as a bonus, result in a major cutback in criminal justice spending. Since most anyone who desires to use banned drugs probably already does so, the additional health problems caused by legalization would be minuscule compared to the social costs of alcohol, tobacco and sugar.
The City Council has a 1950s view of low-income housing and programs. The Council members (especially Eb Moran) think that only nice, law-abiding families and individuals will move into all of the low-income housing that the Council makes available through government subsidies.
I wish that that were so -- nice families and individual of all races moving in and making our communities better places to live. Yet, from recent news reports, it appears that convicted criminals may be represented in noticeable percentages among the housing-subsized residents.
I AM NOT SAYING THAT ALL LOW-INCOME RESIDENTS ARE CRIMINALS OR CONVICTS. Please do not misconstrue my argument as that simplistic or misguided.
Instead, if the City knew that for every 10 low-income housing units that it has made available in the last 10 years that 2 convicted felons have moved into Evanston, would that make the City change its thinking about what it does with its funding for low-income housing and programs?
Why not help the law-abiding individuals and families who are already here and could use a hand keeping their houses?
I agree that not all low income residents are criminals or convicts but what I want to know is where you got your data that 2 out of every 10 low income housing units has been rented to a convicted felon in the last 10 years? Reply back in this post with the web address, or magazine citation or something about where you came up with those numbers. If you had to back up your numbers in school you should back them up in life.
Apparently, I wasn't clear.
The City Council should conduct a study on the number of convicted criminals living in subsidized housing. I believe that all Evanston residents have a right to know that data. Perhaps it already exists but is not being disclosed.
If you watch the crime reports carefully, you will start having the same questions -- are we encouraging convicted criminals to locate in Evanston and shouldn't we be helping hard-working families and individuals to stay in their Evanston homes, rather than adding more subsidized housing?
I was at the meeting you cherry-picked your quote from. The way you present it here couldn't be further from the truth. Alderman Bernstein was speaking to the fact that residents in the communities have to take action against crime... that pretending it doesn't exist is no solution. He spoke to securing windows, starting neighborhood watch groups, joining the community police program, getting a security assessment on your home, etc.
He and Alderman Jean-Baptiste will meet with our groups again tonight to continue to address the issue of crime in our neighborhoods. To suggest they don't "care if residents are continual [sic] attacked" is irresponsible.
I know Steve Bernstein and I don't believe that he meant that we should just live with crime because it is a reality. The reality is that crime leads are country in interest, (TV shows abound with crime, programs like Prison Break, JAIL, COPS,) are huge amongst their viewers with new crime-type shows coming out all the time. We lead the world in imprisoning people with a prison system both state and Federal that society has little to do with in its operations. For the past 30 years governments (state and Federal) have listened to its citizenry and "locked em' up and thrown away the key." Many prisons (many, many) have stripped from their programs of any vestage of rehabilitative incentives to improve prisoners chances of making a successful transition from prison to society.
Drugs have pervaded society like no other plague imaginable, across all socio-economic groups, all ethnic groups. Crime fuels the purchase of drugs in a never ending cycle. Crime is linked to many different factors but primarily its a moral disintegration of values. If you want to reduce crime than you need to look at how to influence or change the criminal. The question may become how do we best utilize our resources to control crime. Do we beef up our police force? Do we add more blue light specials on each corner. Do we campaign for more rehabilitative programs in prisons?
So far in this thread of comments folks have been quibbling over what one person stated in the original article. Rather than go on the defensive and issue statements that are inflammatory or replete with ridicule, why don't we pick the meat and leave the bones and get down to brass tacks and come up with creative solutions that end in action. When I wanted this community to look at re-entry issues for ex-offenders (not a popular subject by any means) I asked the Governor's Task Force on Re-entry to come to Evanston. I then secured a location for the forum, Invited the city government and the community to attend and maybe 100 people showed up. Lets see what else can be done.
Drugs have pervaded society like no other plague imaginable, across all socio-economic groups, all ethnic groups.
"Drugs" aren't the problem, the prohibition of harmless drugs like marijuana is.
I agree with Anonymous that drugs do not cause crime. Most crime is caused by drug prohibition. Obviously Americans have forgotten the lesson of alcohol prohibition, which is that laws intended to protect people from themselves will corrupt law enforcement and spawn warring criminal gangs, spurred on by huge profits, to operate outside the law in order to provide the forbidden substance. At least back then it was widely understood that a constitutional amendment was needed to regulate what people put in their bodies. Today, the Constitution is the last thing on politicians minds when pandering to people's irrational fears.
Today we shake our heads in disbelief that our ancestors were so superstitious and cruel as to torture and burn hundreds of people at the stake for the crime of being "witches." A century from today people will shake their heads in disbelief that a sophisticated and educated society would, for decades, believe that it was doing good by fining and jailing tens of millions of their fellow humans for the victimless crime of putting substances in their bodies that others disapproved of. Our descendants will be appalled that a collective madness has blinded us to the staggering toll in lives, treasure, quality of life and civil liberties extracted by the war on drugs. They will wonder why our fervor for this cruel war was repeatedly redoubled in the face of its ongoing failure. Finally, future generations will hold us in contempt for not only saddling them with a crippling military, industrial complex perpetually in search of foreign enemies to destroy but also for a bloated criminal "justice," prison complex perpetually lobbying for laws criminalizing everything in order to also justify its continued existence.
Evanston has taken the first step in fighting crime and restoring a right by finally repealing its unconstitutional handgun ban. We now have the opportunity to be noted nationally for something other than having so little to show for some of the nation's highest property tax. We can take a second, much bigger step in fighting crime and further repair the Bill of Rights by repealing all local laws prohibiting what people put in their bodies. We can also lobby the state legislature and governor to pardon all those in jail on drug related charges. That will electrify the world and assure us the gratitude of future generations.
John - you are looking for a national solution, I am looking ----at Evanston and what might be affordable and doable for the taxpayers.
I do not disagree with you prison are not reforming very few if any prisoners to be productive members of society. That is why I am not to interest in seeing any of these people returning to Evanston. ( which I realize maybe be very harsh)
But the rate of those who go to prison and then return is quite high - 50% or more -
Also locally we have very high taxes - at the same time - this year they wanted to cut $70,000 of the mental health budget - and they have cut the health department.
So the city does not have resources to spend on ex-cons. Since you have been involved in this issue - how many ex-cons are in town? I would guess several hundred. Let say we created program to provide comprehensive services to this group - what might it cost? 100 people X $20,000 = 2 million dollars - can the city budget afford this. look at most of the programs the city provides now and you will quickly see most are no doing much - if solving any real problems - they mostly pay for city staff and give programs grants that appear to have little impact.
We face a hard reality here - one council members are not going to talk much in public about the number of ex-cons in town since they are not willing to discuss the fact we have a crime problem - that would only highlight it. While they may political support this with lip service they are not going to do much .
I think on a national basis there are some solutions but I am thinking more locally -
Junad, my guess is that you use sweeping generalizations about problems so you can oversimplify the answer. Unfortunately, this can’t be done with success: crime is a big word for many, many specific little problems which need to be addressed individually. Certainly, we'd all love a one-policy answer to crime in the same way we'd like a one-shot answer to health: wishing doesn't make it so.
For instance, you often suggest that we would get rid of Evanston's crime problem if we "got rid" of our less fortunate neighbors, in hopes of removing the “criminal element” (presumably along with all the honest people of modest means.) Besides being incredibly offensive and unconstitutional, anyone who looks at the crime reports on a daily basis will see that many crimes here are perpetrated by those who live elsewhere – over whom City policy has no jurisdiction. It’s not an answer.
Yes, crime is a problem. Yes, we need an answer – but that answer most often involves a partnership between the City and residents to identify and address problems individually, and policies that encourage us all to be good neighbors.
Find out more about Brummel Park Neighbors and Michele Hays
Michele - if anyone reads the 8th ward quicktopic -they would quickly get the impression the area is full of crime. Since the majority of the postings are about the crime problems. It does not appear to me, the partnership the city and residents have or would create is solving anything. The 8th ward board continues to speak of drug house and other problems. They do not appear to be getting solved by the partnership you speak of here.
If you read the article on SNAP the police officer maded the statement the 1900 block of Jackson has been a problem for years. So what partnership has worked here?
Michele you use one of the old Evanston's comments that most of the crime is committed by others not residents - that is nonsense. Many of those who they are classifying as non-residents have connections here. The High School used this quite a bit in the past when one of their students did something - they would claim they were not in enrolled or had drop out etc. By the way a police officer once told me most to the criminals from other communities would get lost here - that is they are mostly Evanston residents committing the crimes.
Michele - I have never suggested anything unconstitutional, as you suggest. It would appear you are happy with buildings in your neighborhood that are partial vacant, have drug dealers using them? Or would you prefer buildings that have been convert to condos and have homeowners? I have not certain what is unconstitutional about that? The city has been using economic development and give aways here for years to encourage change to so called "blight areas" with TIFs. Ofcourse the areas were not really blighted.
Actually Michele - the people of modest means are getting displace here anyway. The high taxes are pushing them out. The increase cost of the pensions which you may some day benifit from are going to push property taxes here through the roof. ( I believe next year we will see tax increases close to 10%)
Junad, I'm living in the neighborhood in question. I am very well aware of the problems - much more so than you are, as you live on the other side of town.
Yes, I have seen the partnership work - but it is a delicate process that takes time, which can lead to the frustration you see on the 8th Ward board. When I moved here, my block had 9 bad buildings on it and open-air drug dealing on the street. We are now down to 2 bad buildings, and, though the police and neighbors are aware it still exists, the drug market is greatly reduced, and what there is has gone under cover. If you look at the crime map, linked in this site, you will see that the area covered by our Neighborhood Watch has a lower crime rate than areas immediately surrounding it.
A typical example of your thought process: out of one side of your mouth you call us blighted, and then on the other side complain that our TIF district doesn't really need financial incentives. As far as my neighbors - provided that they are law-abiding citizens, I have no problem with anyone, be they owner or tenant. I love my neighborhood and enjoy my neighbors - and am working with the police and City to get rid of people who actively commit crimes. Period.
You, on the other hand, are working not from experience but from conjecture. Without this or actual statistics from crime reports, you are, as I said, just making meaningless generalizations. Finally, you aren't offering solutions that can be implemented, much less which appear they could have a positive effect on the problem. Until you show you actually understand reality, I'm done with this discussion.
Find out more about Brummel Park Neighbors and Michele Hays
Michele - you make some good points on your neighborhood but crime is throughout Evanston - the city selected three areas for this SNAP program.
You commented on "crime reports" - that I have not used them - and I am generalizing. The police can run the crime reports for any area in town - since you have been working closely with the police I am certain they have given you reports - the Police department web page links to all the yearly crime reports.
I could file a FOIR and get reports generated for any area of town -
There also is one report of particular interest - it is a comparison of index crime through out the years - the report said what I stated in 1997 we have the highest index crime - but does not explain the drop in 1998. Interestly the crime index has been flat for the last few years. Thus while one small area may improve such a your neighborhood over all there may be little improvement.
While you neighborhood group may be making inroads - as you state the other areas around show higher crime. Thus has your group just displaced the crime to another area of the ward? or another ward? If you correct some buildings does the problem move in the city or out of town? You are really doing what I am suggesting anyway that is you are improving the neighborhood building by building.
On one statement you made " out of one side of your mouth you call us blighted, and then on the other side complain that our TIF district doesn't really need financial incentives. " I did not know your neighborhood had a TIF district? I was referring to all the TIFs created in the downtown for development - the city claimed those areas as blighted and with crime to get the TIFs.
As to your statement "you aren't offering solutions that can be implemented, much less which appear they could have a positive effect on the problem."
I think it may be a very good idea to create TIFs in really blighted and areas with high crime here - to encourage conversion of buildings from rental to ownership - that is allow owners finanicing through TIFs to convert the buildings.( that is about specific as I can get)
Michele I think you are very active in your neighborhood but not all neighborhoods can generate this activism, to solve crime - other areas may need different solutions.( also Ann Rainey has played a very large part in solving many problems in the area, here again other wards may not have an council member of her experience )
Junad -- I have got to support Kristin with her concerns about your language. It is not just a case of being PC. The use of the term "slum" does not really fit my picture of any neighborhoods in town. I think we are in agreement that there are areas that have buildings with problems and people with problem/troublesome/ illegal behaviors. I did not hear Kristin pretending that problems do not exist. However, the language that is used to describe places paints a picture that has a lot to do with the way that people react to and orient themselves to those places and the people who reside there.
I don't mean to speculate. But I believe that Alderman Rainey already has probably got a pretty good and comprehensive list of answers to the questions that you raised. And I believe that she has not been trying to ignore or deny that there are problems she is dealing with in her area.
In the Roundtable ( July 3) the following statement was made by Alderperson Steve Bernstein “We’re not a suburb, we’re urban suburban. Crime is a fact of life here. We may not like it, but we have to live with it.”
This statement shows a public official, along with others on the city council who seem to not care if residents are continual attacked and hurt here by the criminal element who live in this community.
No, it shows that Steve Bernstein recognizes that Evanston has a crime problem. In your other postings, Junad, you have criticized aldermen - unnamed , of course - who deny that Evanston has a crime problem. Now, when an alderman recognizes that we have crime, you accuse him of not caring about crime.
Your statements are irrresponsible.
Criminals and Council members are the problem here. Until the council wants to eliminate the criminal population from this community innocent citizens will continue to be the victims of their crimes.
How do we identify and eliminate the "criminal population"?
Please provide details. What is meant by 'eliminate'? Will they be taken out and shot? Incarcerated? Run out of town by an angry mob?
I would like to know what specific measures you would propose if you were an alderman. I suspect that you will not answer, or if you do, your proposal will be recognized as blatantly unconstitutional ( at least by everybody except Scalia, Thomas, and Alito ).
I think that your helmet needs more tinfoil - apparently the waves from the television are getting to you.
Mr Who you can not be involved in this issue hiding behind your computer---
The other poster who comment on my blog statement is quite involved in the issues in her neighborhood. I have not met her - but she at least identifies herself. I respect her involvement in the issue.
If you read careful you would understand if a public offical states "We may not like it, but we have to live with it.” does not show much of an attitude to wanting to correct the problem.
If you knew anything about what is going on here - you might understand what I am saying.
By the way - I am not sure you are concerned about your taxes or not - but the largestt department in the budget here is the police department, if you understand how little the council really is involve in its issues - ( I forgot you only watch council meeting on TV) Police issues are discussed in Human Services which is not on TV. Go attend the meeting.
Putting in a IHOP or Cosco is not going to solve the crime problem.
Junad, as a resident of the 100-300 block of Custer, I am outraged at your use of the word "slum" to describe my neighborhood.
That area is certainly one of the most challenged in Evanston, but by attaching such a derogatory label to it you ignore the presence and efforts of concerned neighbors, while simultaneously giving too much "credit" to the "bad apples."
Our area does have its "problem" individuals and buildings. However, the majority of people in our neighborhood are decent, law-abiding folks who care about their properties and the condition of the community.
I do appreciate your concern over the high crime rate in our part of town; all too often, our problems are minimized, rationalized, or ignored. However, I ask that you voice your opinions in a way that is more respectful of Evanston's residents, regardless of geographical location.
Junad, as a resident of the 100-300 block of Custer, I am outraged at your use of the word "slum" to describe my neighborhood.
I live in south east Evanston and completely agree with this characterization of the 8th ward. Frankly, I won't even go in that neighborhood and the few people I know who have ventured in recently have been mugged.
If there are so many great people in your neighborhood, the lot of you need to get together and deal with the serious crime problem you have. However, that neighborhood has never good in the 30+ years I've lived in Evanston, so I won't hold my breath.
Enjoy muggings, gang members firing guns on south Custer and women worrying whether someone will sexually assault them as they enter their buildings, because that what you have now and will continue to have so long as residents pretend the crime in that neighborhood is remotely acceptable.
Kristin - I am not one to be political correct -Too many people here are worried about that - Its time the city start to deal with the problems here and stop pretending problems do not exist - I think we are both in agreement on that.
Kristin since you live in the area - how many problem buildings are there and how many problem individuals do you feel live in the neighborhood?
Also what would like the city do to correct the problems?
Junad Rizki wrote:
Kristin since you live in the area - how many problem buildings are there and how many problem individuals do you feel live in the neighborhood?
Also what would like the city do to correct the problems?< /cite>
That is exactly what I - and others - have been asking you, Junad. What do you propose that we do?
Here is my proposal:
1. Raise Revenue or funds available to city by :
a Cutting nonessential city services. ( Central St. Library, elm trees)
b. Putting more property on the tax rolls ( Dawes House, new tower at 708 Church)
c. Possibly even increasing taxes - although this is odious.
2. Use those funds for:
a. Additional cops
b. Better technology for police
c. Community programs that prevent crime
d. Strict enforcement of housing codes
Unlike Junad, I do not pretend to be the expert in policing, so I would let knowledgeable people make proposals on how to best prevent crime using a mix of choices above, or others.
So Junad, there is my proposal. I don't claim that it is perfect. I am eager to hear your plans.
Who - I can not spend my time educating a no-name poster - who could be a kid -see my post to Jason - as for your post
2. Use those funds for:
a. Additional cops ( Who the police force is adequately staffed - ofcourse at one point HR screwed up the hiring and we were understaff )
b. Better technology for police ( what do they need? I recently heard the computer system had a screw up and the officers had to enter everything by hand. maybe you should look into this?)
c. Community programs that prevent crime ( Who - go check it out they have the "community policing" on here for years - they even have neighborhood out posts.
d. Strict enforcement of housing codes ( final they are enforcing the codes - go take a look how much they are spending on staff)
Finally on your revenue proposals
1. Raise Revenue or funds available to city by :
a Cutting nonessential city services. ( Central St. Library, elm trees)
Give it up on the elms - you do not know what your talking about - the cost is far great to lose them - the council final understood this - as for the Central St library - it about $250,000 -police department budget is about $13-$18 million go check it for the exact number - no effect - and the branches are not likely to be cut anyway.
b. Putting more property on the tax rolls ( Dawes House, new tower at 708 Church) Who the dawes house if it is every put on the tax rolls will give the city about $4,000 this will do nothing - go check out the salary of a police officer with benifits -
c. Possibly even increasing taxes - although this is odious.
( does not need to be done - period for more enlarge police budget - will be done to pay for the pension screw up )
Who you continue to post with little knowledge of what is going on here - may I suggest you go to the next citizens police academy if you want to expand your knowledge - but I forgot you wish to hide behind your computer playing with your tin foil,
Junad, I think it's fairly safe to say that no one WANTS to have criminals as their neighbors. That being said, this is America, and people have a right to live where they please--this includes people who have criminal records.
Now, does this mean that criminals have a right to continue their illegal acts with impugnity? Of course not. Unfortunately, our legal system makes it very difficult to prosecute and convict criminals in an efficient manner. The problems of our overcrowded prisons leads to a "revolving door" policy that does very little to curb repeat offenders. Finally, add to this a police force frequently hamstrung by accusations of racism, "profiling" and abuse and misconduct, and you start to see why it becomes nearly impossible to "drive out" the criminal element.
Now, you seem to be of the opinion that condo conversion is the silver bullet to take care of this problem. Guess what? The housing market stinks! Home prices are astronomical, and even when "urban pioneers" do come into troubled neighborhoods (I refuse to use your terms of "slums" or "blighted"), they frequently find it easier to flee to the far outlying suburbs for 1.5 acre plots and single-family homes for the same cost as condo or townhouse in Evanston.
Have you seen the condo conversion taking place in south Evanston? It's pretty impressive. However, guess what? They are almost constantly in a state of being up for sale. Who do you propose is going to buy them? And who do you think can afford them? Is an empty condo conversion more beneficial to a neighborhood than rental units with responsible landlords, good maintenance, and screened (and monitored) tenants? As the mortgage crisis washes away the foundations of our economy, too often we see the short-sightedness of providing mortgages for anyone who applies--rampant foreclosures, people left homeless, and the increased potential for criminal mortgage fraud.
Home ownership is both a right and a priveledge--this is a capitalist society, which means that anyone can purchase whatever they can afford. The problem arises when home buyers and mortgage brokers use faulty figures to assess how much home can be afforded. Unless you want to socialize the home buying process...
By, the way... You seem to be equating "poor" with "criminal." Not to get all "P.C." on you...
Jason - you make some points - Let me give you my views.
1) interesting program on NPR - this week - Racial Balance Shifts as "White Flight subsides" this was on talk of the Nation July 21,2008 -"For decades, white residents have left urban areas for the suburbs, changing the racial make-up of America's cities. Now, in some cities, the trend has reversed. As the racial balance shifts in historically black neighborhoods, new arguments are brewing over race, class, culture and identity." The interest point of the program was people with money are moving back into urban areas -
The energy crisis will clearly make Evanston more attractive to people who work in the city or suburbs near by -
Will they strongly consider moving out 50 miles with the price of gas above $4 a gallon? People may not be as interested in 1.5 acres.( firefighters maybe alittle different since they work one shift so coming into work and leaving - not a daily commute it is alittle different)
2) while yes there is a mortgage crisis people are still buying homes - thus homes are selling -maybe not for higher prices - maybe less buyers but they are selling- thus well priced properties in a good area will find buyers. ( the city affordable housing programs appear to me not to have well price properties since they seem not to sell ) -
3) you seem to think properties will not sell in south Evanston - I think the problem here is look at how the city has approached - development here - they have placed everything into the downtown - they have encourage all redevelopment in that area - they have not encouraged anything in areas you would call "troubled" What has the city done to market and improve the trouble areas to buyers - the SNAP program is not the answer.
4) what is the purpose of TIFs one criteria was to improve "blighted -high crime areas" why have there been no TIFs in Blighted high crime areas in Evanston?
I will admit I do not know the ratio of rental to condos on the 100-300 block of Custer ( you or Michele may? ) - but if the city TIf's the area and allowed the developers to borrow funds at low interest - or no interest to improve and then sell the condos - it might speed up the process of solving the blight.
5) Jason - I never said every poor person here is a criminal - I think the data will bear it out that a very large majority of those convicted of crime - are at the lower social-economic scale - just the very rich can get away with crime - but I am talking about large groups over the entire nation. Given the police here - may not be willing to have this discuss - since yes it is not PC - I will have to say I once attend a meeting on crime which was not well publicized at the Civic Center- crime issues in the 5th ward -quite a few years ago - and the concerned neighbors were giving the Chief a grilling on crime - final he said your neighborhood has lot of criminals - which makes it difficult to deal with the problem. ( He also stated about 50% of the residents support the police and the other 50% did not )
Jason - please tell me of a rich suburb area with a index crime problem even as close to Evanston - compare Wilmette to Evanston and you will see the difference in the index and type of crime. ( and please don't tell me to move to Wilmette)
Finally I do hold public officials responsible here for the crime problem since the don't want to create the change to elminate the problem - I think it is fine what Michele is doing but few residents want to spend there time in court and on extensive neighborhood activities - her idea may work very well in the local area you live but Evanston is a very large community and crime will just displace itself to other areas. ( she did point this out )
Jason - since I tried to answer you question maybe we should start a new discussion on the pensions - give they just increased by 5 million - would you like to start a blog?- since it is my belief we are going to see another high tax increase about 10% next year. I think this pension issue maybe hard to solve than the crime problem.
Post new comment