Crown Heights Group Still Doesn't Want Homeless Center

The Bedford-Atlantic Armory will be perfect as an intake center. I love this plan and support it fully.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 10:19 AM

"The community district has six times the average residential social services beds at 116 per 100 acres, the highest in the borough." - Thank you, Sarah. Crown Heights has done its share for areas of the city and the borough that have not done theirs.

Much more attention needs to be given to the use of funds alloted for homeless care. It is just wrong that a shelter is closed and the funds saved did not go into permanent housing, as promised.

Most homeless people do not have friends or family that they can stay with, that's part of the reason they are homeless. Duh. Any policy based on ridiculous assumptions like this is automatically doomed to failure, and the administration knows that.

Helping those who cannot help themselves is supposed to be an expression of who we are as a civilization. I plan on being at the rally, not just because it's my community, but because this policy is not just, fair or in any way, correct.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 10:34 AM

Faithful (10:19):

What a building! And what a handsome public space -- Grant Square! Both were down the street from me when I grew up in Crown Heights during the 1950's.

This place should be the pride of Brooklyn. The "bones" are already there: the armory, the Imperial Apartments, the old Union League Club, and several other handsome buildings, all framing an ample intersection that with some sidewalk treatment, lighting, and landscaping could rival -- yes! -- Grand Army Plaza. (Come to think of it, throw in a farmer's market.)

What the City's doing to Crown Heights is what happened to the neighborhood when I was a boy, when government indifference allowed a robust middle-class neighborhood to spiral into disrepair that only now -- through the efforts of people like you -- is coming back.

Sure, sprinkle homeless shelters throughout the city so every neighborhood shares social responsibility, but don't concentrate the homeless in Crown Heights. And if the existing shelter at the armory stays, mix it with improvements and other uses that will polish and enliven Grant Square.

Nostalgic on Park Avenue

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 10:42 AM

When the Mayor does this, he's seeking to dump Manhattan's problems on all of Brooklyn, not just Crown Heights. As others have pointed out, the homeless will largely ride the subways to get to Brooklyn. Clearly not all will make it as far as Crown Heights, stopping off in Brooklyn Heights, downtown, Park Slope, Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens, etc. I'm ready to rally!

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 10:42 AM

It's going to take more than rallies- every bit of political clout you can muster will be important. The Mayor has long thought of Brooklyn as Manhattan's annex and dumping ground. His legacy will be to leave Manhattan a rarefied island of luxury housing, restaurants, and tourist attractions while the "outer" boroughs will be holding bins for whatever doesn't fit. And while he has been more than generous in donating to the arts (and lord knows they need it), when it comes to anything related to social issues, Bloomberg doesn't get it.

I'm curious to see what our next mayor does. At least with Marty you know he'll champion Brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 10:57 AM

To which organization at what address can I send a check?

Nostalgic on Park Avenue

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 11:01 AM

NOP, you are so correct in your vision of a beautiful Grant Square. I look forward to this vision coming true as Crown Heights grows and prospers in the years to come.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 11:19 AM

"10:19...it seems that you have it in for Crown Heights...."

Incorrect. I have nothing against Crown Heights.

"When I first discovered this blog about two years ago, I was so excited because it was totally about Brooklyn. I was born and breed in Brooklyn and I love every part of it."

Congratulations. I feel the same way.

"Why would you think that this proposal would not affect other neighborhoods?"

When you show me where I said that it would not affect other neighborhoods, then I'll answer your question.

"How do think that most of these gentlemen will get to the Armory? Limo? Cab? No...our good ole subway system."

Any idea how many people use the subway each day? You're talking about a drop in the bucket. If you're unhappy with subway service, tell it to the MTA and stop venting your bile on the homeless people of our city.

"So before you go and support a proposal without fully thinking it through because it's not in your neck of the woods, think of the borough that you decided to make home, not just the street in the borough."

For your information, I do live in Crown Heights. So before you go and make assumptions without fully thinking them through, try actually reading the posts you're replying to.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 11:23 AM

Thanks, Faithful. Turns out I responded to your morning post in the "Echoes" thread re. Crown Heights riots. Gee, will the neighborhood ever get its due?

Hello, Montrose. We haven't communicated about CH in a while, but it looks like there'll be plenty to discuss in the coming weeks.

NOP

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 11:27 AM

I was at a community forum last night in Prospect Heights where this issue was discussed with Tish James and Hakeem Jeffries. Not only is the Bedford-Atlantic Armory one of the most dangerous, poorly runs shelters in the city, it's also right across the street from another 150+ bed shelter creating an already huge burden on the local community. And, to rub salt into the wound, Bloomberg wants the current Bellevue intake center bid out as a luxury hotel! There are some things about Mayor Mike that I like, but his total prioritizing of Manhattan over the other boros is elitist b.s.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 11:31 AM

Since Montrose Morris has never claimed to have anything to do with the organization of the rally, I hardly think any posts supposedly by him/her regarding its scheduling would have any truth to them. Ignore them, it's just the MM hating troll at work again.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 12:27 PM

12:27, I assure you I am not faking anything, but I appreciate your watching my back!

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 12:44 PM

This is a horrible idea. It is unfair to both the homeless men and the residents of Crown Heights/Bed-Stuy. This situation will adversely affect all of the downtown Brooklyn neighborhoods whose residents BTW should show up at this meeting as well. Do you think that the men will just loiter in the immediate vicinity of the armory? They will no doubt travel back to their old haunts in Manhattan and discover new places in route. Srvice Brooklyn's homeless populationin Brooklyn and Manhattan's in Manhattan.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 1:19 PM

"Helping those who cannot help themselves is supposed to be an expression of who we are as a civilization. I plan on being at the rally, not just because it's my community, but because this policy is not just, fair or in any way, correct."

No, you are attending the rally because your home is not far from the shelter and you are terrified what the presence of more homeless people will do to your property values. You talk a good game about helping the less fortunate, but your actions speak otherwise.

Besides, a mere rally will not stop this proposed change, because there is simply no better existing place to move the intake center. If you know of one, kindly enlighten us.

In the end, this is about one group of human beings looking down on another group of human beings and trying to keep them out of their "territory", even as they claim to care about homelessness. It's no different from past civil rights problems, only this is about class rather than race.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 2:12 PM

"A source close to the mayor's office told us the goal is to make the intake center more difficult to reach so fewer men would turn to the shelter system, in hopes that they would instead stay with friends or family."

Typical of fiscal conservatives like Bloomie. Penny wise pound foolish. Save a few pennies by doing this but lose MILLIONS in lost tax revenues because they turn back the clock on improvements of this borough, and families start moving to the suburbs again instead of Brooklyn.

As for who in Brooklyn who should care about this - contractors and suppliers should be in a panic, and making sure the improvement in these areas of Brooklyn continue. Why? They make their money from renovating old houses that had fallen into disrepair. Park Slope is nice but of course most the houses have been sold to new owners by the old generation and fully renovated by now. Where are you contractors going to turn next to get hired to gut-renovate an entire house, or provide the materials for it, but in the *fringe* areas as peole migrate into those areas?

Oh and by the way that's more lost revenues for the city, the fact that there would be much less houses being renovated. Fewer jobs, fewer materials being sold by suppliers, less retail sales at home improvement stores and furniture stores. On and on and on. If there are fewer people buying in Brooklyn and instead leaving the city, it would mean a slowdown or departure of amenities even in the more established neighborhoods. The whole thing is idiotic.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 2:21 PM

Having NO intake center in Manhattan but having one in Brooklyn, that doesn't make the people of Manhattan the ones who are the biggest NIMBY's of all, 2:12??

How about those who own and live near the current intake center. How many of those people are happy to see it go and have a condo there instead? PLENTY.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 2:23 PM

"Sabotage is just a cowardly way of trying to take away that right."

Indeed it is. You've taught us that less very well, "Sarah".

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 2:26 PM

"less" = "lesson"

Serves me right for trying to type and scarf a cannoli at the same time.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 2:28 PM

Thanks Rachel! You rule.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 2:30 PM

"Helping those who cannot help themselves is supposed to be an expression of who we are as a civilization. I plan on being at the rally, not just because it's my community, but because this policy is not just, fair or in any way, correct."

Yea, right. If the intake shelter were being moved to Canarsie or Woodhaven, Queens, I am 100% confident that you would not attend this rally.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 2:54 PM

What is this mentality that's being perpetuated as Manhattan vs. Brooklyn regarding homelessness? When did the boundaries of homelessness get defined? As far as I know,each of us contributes tax dollars that fund the expenditures the City spends on the homeless. Temporary housing is not a solution. There are proven ways that work to assist the homeless in housing. And, even if one doesn't have an altruistic side and feels that there is an obligation to help others, one should realize that homelessness is everyone's issue because the thousands of dollars spent in shelter or for hospital visits of a homeless person are being paid by...guess who? Yes, all of you who reside in Brooklyn. Some of the banter of late on this blog is ridiculous.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 3:03 PM

"What is this mentality that's being perpetuated as Manhattan vs. Brooklyn regarding homelessness?"

Because the reason they want to put this homeless intake center in Brooklyn is because they want to CLOSE the CURRENT intake center in Manhattan. And build a condo there. Try researching a topic first 3:03, before commenting on it like you're the big expert.

The debate is about whether to stick with the old way to do it, an intake center in each borough, like it was done for ages. Or to have only one intake center way inside Brooklyn requiring the homeless you care so much about to travel on subways and buses to get there. The mayor hopes this arduous journey will make the homeless choose to stay with family instead. Again, not good for your homeless you pretend to care so much about.

Sometimes the banter we get from the clueless is ridiculous.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 3:13 PM

Bloomberg's intent is to convince the homeless to stop trying to get services. How many in Manhattan will even have the transportation money to get here? And 2:23 is right- Manhattan is the biggest NIMBY of all. My neighborhood has far more than its fair share of shelters- we aren't asking that there be no shelters. we're saying everyone and every neighborhood do its share. A great number of people in Crown Heights have lived here all their lives. Some families have been here for generations - they've worked hard to bring back the neighborhood, and with all the churches and community groups, have done a great deal in caring for the less fortunate in the community. making the armory the primary intake center for single homeless men is an unconscionable added burden to a neighborhood that is already overburdened.

bxgrl

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 4:01 PM

For anyone who cares, I'm having some software problems, and it is affecting my ability to sign in and post as Montrose Morris. I hope to have this fixed soon. In the meantime, I'm posting as "guest" and signing in my posts. I know that leaves me free to be easily impersonated, but it always surprises me that someone with too much free time sits there and writes personal assaults and insults, spoofs my posts, and otherwise acts like a 12 year old.

I intend to be at the rally. This is an important cause for all of us, not just Crown Heights residents. Kudos to the poster who laid out the trickle down progression - loss of jobs, loss of economic upturn, and the stagnation of a growing and ever more vital neighborhood.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 4:05 PM

2:12, since you have no idea what I do or don't do for the homeless, or anyone else, please spare me the false indignation over my post.

No one argues that a part of the Armory should not be used as a shelter. It already is. The argument is that, first of all, the existing shelter needs to be run correctly. Speaking solely for myself, I'd like to see the shelter have programs designed to train and steer these men back into jobs andsociety. Some will never make it, some could, if they only had second chances. Just providing a bed, and then booting men out into the street during the day is not enough.

Secondly, as has been pointed out time and again, we are not the right place to receive Manhattan's homeless for all the reasons stated by CHRM and other posters.

Propping up my property values is not my concern, as I plan on staying here for the long haul, good or bad, so no game there. And please, spare me the class war remarks, as this issue is about a Manhattan-centric elitist administration's lack of solutions to homelessness. If anyone is waging a class war, it's the Mayor's office, not the poor, working class, middle class and upper middle classes of Crown Heights, who are united in opposition to this policy.

If an armory is the ideal place for this, there are plenty of them in Manhattan. Pick one. There is a lovely one on Park Avenue. Why shouldn't that one serve just as well as our 23rd Regiment Armory, as an intake center for the homeless of Manhattan? Centrally located, nice big space.....

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 4:28 PM

Gee Montrose, to be best of my knowledge the mayor's plan does not forbid teaching skills to the homeless. But you're certainly right that, if his plan did forbid teaching skills to the homeless, that would be a bad thing.

Your claim not to care about your own property values because you don't plan to move is ludicrous. Of course you care about your property values. You never know, you might have to move one day for a variety of reasons. So stop playing dumb.

And your "There an armory at this other location they could use" is straight out of the NIMBY playbook. Surely you can do better than that.

I was opposed to the mayor's plan, but some of the CH posters here are convincing me that it has merit.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 4:55 PM

Go to hell.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 5:03 PM

Biff @3:31, why would you attribute all of these quips to a single poster...unless you know something we don't. And if you have some idea who this poster is, why not expose him right here and now?

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 5:10 PM

4:55- is there some reason you seem unable to read what MM actually writes? Do you deliberately misconstrue everything?

Montrose isn't saying she/he has no concern for his property value- but that concern over the shelter is a community and neighborhood concern. It has nothing to do with nimbyism since that is really a Manhattan issue. And has been stated a number of time, Crown Heights is over saturated already. This is simply the community putting its foot down and standing up for itself. If you think that has no merit, you're free to move next door to the armory after they add the men from Manhattan.

bxgrl

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 5:51 PM

Bxgrl, he said "Propping up my property values is not my concern, as I plan on staying here for the long haul, good or bad, so no game there." How much clearer can it be? That I interpreted him correctly is further evidenced by his childish "Go to hell" response. Guess I hit a nerve :)

And I live not too far from the Armory, thank you very much.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 6:43 PM

You misinterpret and I am sure the go to hell response is not from MM- I have never seen MM post like that, although the troll certainly has, using MM's name. I think MM was simply saying that they're (her, his, it...whatever)attachment to the neighborhood is not based on the property values, but on neighborhood values. I find MM's statement far more believable than " I was opposed to the mayor's plan, but some of the CH posters here are convincing me that it has merit." :-)

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 6:57 PM

What is "believable" for you is of absolutely no concern to me. You're obviously a lightweight who is ill-equipped to read this blog. And that post was from M.M. Don't act stupid with this "someone else said this under my name" claptrap. This is just a convenient excuse when someone has said something that they later regret. Pathetic.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 7:14 PM

kinda touchy aren't you? Well, I guess anyone who is so lacking in anything of merit to say would have to resort to insults and accusations as you do. All of us are entitled to opinions but as I said, you're free to move next to the Armory when they add all those extra beds and put your money where your mouth is.

Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 11:43 PM

Ah, no, 6:43, etc, etc,I did not write "go to hell". That is not my style, and anyone who ever reads my posts will know that I would sooner ask you to descend into the nether Hadean depths, rather than simply tell you to go to hell.

What's pathetic, to use your own wording, is your inability to comprehend that I can be opposed to the Armory becoming Manhattan's intake center for the homeless, because we are already oversaturated, end of story. I've stated it enough times, and given lengthy reasons why, and more importantly, I'm not alone, as is evidenced by the growing organized opposition to it, which I did not start, and have no ties to, other than being in agreement with their position. This is not NIMBYism, it’s us putting our foot down, as Bxgrl says. I have no problem with a shelter there, per se, and I've stated that many times too.

You are free to disbelieve my comments on my property values, just as I am free to disbelieve anything you say. I still say the same, I plan on being in my home for many years to come. Since no one can predict what will happen in life, I see no reason to put a codicil on every remark I make, as in "I'm staying in my home for years, unless I unexpectedly have to move, in which case I will suddenly be hyper aware of my property values, and will base my entire world view with regards as to how anything I do, or anything that happens, will affect that value." If that doesn't do it for you, too bad.

I also am under no obligation to provide you or the city with alternative locations for a shelter. Why is it that any position contrary to what you think is required to submit a full blown dissertation of alternatives, suggestions, or solutions? I don't see any from you. I only see snarky remarks mocking my suggestion that training programs for the homeless are needed to help bring at least some of them back into tax paying, productive society. I said nothing about the mayor forbidding teaching skills. Do not put words into my mouth. If you have any suggestions as to helping the homeless become the ex-homeless, I’d love to hear them. If not, then kindly keep the sarcasm to yourself.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 1:14 AM

"Ah, no, 6:43, etc, etc,I did not write "go to hell".

Uh huh. Sure you didn't. If you can't be accountable for your own words, don't post.

"What's pathetic, to use your own wording, is your inability to comprehend that I can be opposed to the Armory becoming Manhattan's intake center for the homeless, because we are already oversaturated, end of story."

That's what all the NIMBYs say.

"Since no one can predict what will happen in life, I see no reason to put a codicil on every remark I make"

Apparently you see no reason to tell the truth, either.

"I also am under no obligation to provide you or the city with alternative locations for a shelter."

Ah, but you already have. "Anywhere but my neighborhood."

"Why is it that any position contrary to what you think is required to submit a full blown dissertation of alternatives, suggestions, or solutions? I don't see any from you."

Okay. Here's one: Let's go with the mayor's plan. It sounds great.

"I only see snarky remarks mocking my suggestion that training programs for the homeless are needed to help bring at least some of them back into tax paying, productive society. I said nothing about the mayor forbidding teaching skills."

No one said you did.

"Do not put words into my mouth."

I'm certain I'd do a much better job of it than you.

"If you have any suggestions as to helping the homeless become the ex-homeless, I’d love to hear them. If not, then kindly keep the sarcasm to yourself."

Like I said: Pathetic.

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 1:44 AM

1:44, I don't know what your problem is, but I'm not playing anymore. I have stated my reasons for opposing the Armory, and my positions on the homeless in my community, ad nauseum. What I don't understand, is your inability to accept my position as valid for me (and many, many others)without bitter sarcasm and condescending put downs. That is not debating a point, it's just being nasty.

I've told you I did not make that comment about going to hell. I'm sure the troll that did is rolling around on the floor in glee over the trouble he/she caused by it, but I'm not going to further waste my beautiful Saturday by trying to prove otherwise, as I cannot.

It obviously wouldn't matter to you anyway, as you have taken it upon yourself to make this personal and irrational. For some reason, your problem with the Armory is with me, not the supporters of the rally, not with CHRM, not with local politicians, just me, an anonymous poster on a Brooklyn real estate blog. That's what's pathetic. Apparently I piss you off just walking into the room. Well, I can't do anything about that, so let's just stop this now. You don't like me, fine.

An intake center for the homeless of Manhattan in Crown Heights is a bad idea, and I plan on opposing it, as is my right, whether you agree or not. Have a nice day.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 9:46 AM

Montrose, I hope I'm not out of line, but may I say something? I live in Crown Heights, love the neighborhood and enjoy many of your informative posts. I think I've learned a lot about my own neighborhood from you. At the same time, it pains me to see you drawn into juvenile games of tit-for-tat like the one above. I know it is hard to resist when people come on here and behave like absolute jerks and idiots, but I wish you would resist because I really think this kind of malicious back-and-forth is beneath you--and beneath pretty much anyone, to be honest.

It's none of my business, of course, and this is all I intend to say. I just wanted to share these thoughts with you and now, I'm done!

Speaking for myself, the dialogue on this site has degenerated to such a degree that I don't know how much longer I'll bother to read it. Lots of threads start out being very interesting only to sink into a quagmire of vicious insults, sexist and/or racist comments, and so on. And this particular thread, with someone posting phony dates for a rally, reaches a new low. Mr. B, I belong to a couple of community organizations. The next time one of them schedules a meeting or other event, I hope you won't promote it. I also think you need to do something to "raise the bar" for this site. To be honest, I think you need to require registration, but I know we've been down that road before and aren't likely to travel it again.

Sigh.

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 10:02 AM

test

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 10:48 AM

"I have stated my reasons for opposing the Armory"

You've paid lip service to a few mundane NIMBYisms.

"I've told you I did not make that comment about going to hell."

Good grief, do you actually intend to persist in this excuse? Unbelievable.

"For some reason, your problem with the Armory is with me, not the supporters of the rally, not with CHRM, not with local politicians, just me."

In fact I suspect that I would like you were we to meet in person. I like most people. However, I do not appreciate your behavior on this blog and several others have voiced the same sentiment. Fortunately, people are complicated and someone who behaves like a jackass on a blog like this can be surprisingly polite when they're right in front of you and no longer anonymous. 'Tis a good thing, I think.

"An intake center for the homeless of Manhattan in Crown Heights is a bad idea, and I plan on opposing it, as is my right, whether you agree or not"

Yes of course you can do whatever you want to do, whether it's opposing the intake center or crouching down by the side of the road and rubbing gravel into your hair. It's entirely up to you.

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 10:53 AM

10:02-why blame Montrose for the problem? He's one of the few posters who contributes anything of substance and even when replying to the troll- who 1:44 am obviously is- at least you learn something. I think you can drop the holier-than-thou, condescending attitude.

that said i do agree about the tone of the site and that registration is needed. Unfortunately the registration system brownstoner uses is not a very good one since it only takes an extra space to allow someone to create a user name that looks like a legitimate one. this site could also use a mediator who tracks the threads- many other sites do this and it would have stopped a number of attacks, which included posting personal information, on the site.

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 10:55 AM

10:02 here. I am sorry if I sounded holier-than-thou or condescending. That wasn't my intention.

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 11:17 AM

This blog makes me so sad. Man this is depressing.

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 12:02 PM

10:02, point well taken. No sanctimony detected, just concern. I agree. Thanks.

Montrose Morris

Posted by: guest at May 24, 2008 12:26 PM