« Streetlevel: Bakery in Bed Stuy Crown Heights Today on the Forum »

September 26, 2008

Escaped Parolee a Game-Changer for Saint Ann's Stance

147-Pierrepont-Street-0908.jpg
Channel 9's Ti-Hua Chang reports from the streets of Brooklyn Heights about the latest chapter in the controversy surrounding the U.S. Attorney's decision to located a Federal parolee center steps away from the campus of the Saint Ann's School. When news broke about the issue in July, the school administration tried to take an enlightened approach to the matter. "We believe that as long as the school and its neighbors are doing everything they can to ensure student safety, there is a limit to the extent to which the school can or should appropriately try to influence, block or change the environment and facilities in which Saint Ann’s has always chosen to locate itself," wrote the headmaster and board president at the time. Just two weeks into the school year, however, a 32-year-old parolee who'd already done 12 years in jail on drug-related charges, bolted from an interrogation room at 147 Pierrepont Street at 2:50 in the afternoon, ten minutes before school let out. Two armed officers pursued him on the street, where one parent reported seeing one of the officers reach for his gun before thinking better of it. On top of that, it's come to light that 53 sex offenders (six of whom are pedophiles) have been visiting the parole office, contrary to assurances initially given the school administration. Needless to say, the school administration has now changed its tune and will be asking a Federal judge to relocate the probation office to the courts.
Video: Next-Door Parolees Worry Parents [my9tv]
Yassky Weighs in on Saint Ann's Probation Office Affair [Brownstoner]
Saint Ann's To Make the Best of Probation Office Move [Brownstoner]
Federal Probation Officer Defends Proximity to St. Ann's [Brownstoner]
Parole Facility Planned Next Door to St. Ann's School [Brownstoner]




Posted by Brownstoner at 2:58 PM | Comments (26)
Categories: Brooklyn Heights, Crime, Schools

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/6433

Comments

Ohmigod, if I had a child in that school I would be pretty unhappy.

Posted by: sam at September 26, 2008 3:15 PM

From the same neighborhood that brought you PS F, now
it's St.Annie-get-your-gun!

Posted by: Inigo at September 26, 2008 3:23 PM

St. Annie-Get-Your-Gun -- HILARIOUS!

Posted by: bowl of dicks at September 26, 2008 3:42 PM

To think, when this was first brought up months ago, most of the people on this board thought anyone with a concern for this was an overreacting.


Posted by: Prodigal_Son at September 26, 2008 4:12 PM

the problem is that you cant trust that these facilities will be competently managed over time, especially as the city begins to cut its budget.

Posted by: slick at September 26, 2008 4:34 PM

"Ohmigod, if I had a child in that school I would be pretty unhappy. "

...or a child that lives nearby - let's face it, this office is smack-dab in the middle of a family neighborhood...

Posted by: pierre at September 26, 2008 4:37 PM

Pierre is correct, this sort of facility has no place in a residential neighborhood, especially next to a school. What were they thinking?

Posted by: sam at September 26, 2008 4:39 PM

"Residential neighborhood"? Sure, but it is also smack in the middle of downtown Brooklyn. Those very same people are being tried in courts not 100 yards away. Get real. This is New York, where we're all pressed up against each other. Those who can't deal with it should move to the suburbs.

Posted by: statestreeter at September 26, 2008 5:43 PM

statestreeter, it is not very civil to tell people to move out because they disagree with you. There is downtown, and there is Brooklyn Heights. they are adjacent but different. this facility belongs downtown not on Pierrepont Street, which is entirely in Brooklyn Heights. You may feel that you are all pressed up agaisnt people, I do not know your situation, but many of us feel we deserve more, and we feel justified in demanding it from elected officials and from judges, who as a group, are perhaps the most entitled and arrogant professionals on the planet. I resent that a judge feels it is A-OK to place a parole office next to a school. It is arrogant and exhibits a certain level of backward-thinking. Brownstone Brooklyn is no longer composed primarily of kooks and misfits. There are serious people living here now. It's 2008. And these people are not going to take this passively, I do not think it is necessary to wait for a child to be taken hostge or (God forbid)shot to demand the removal of this facilty from the neighborhood. Perhaps you should check your attitude and move somewhere yourself where you might feel more at home. Brooklyn has changed around you.

Posted by: sam at September 26, 2008 6:29 PM

Also, these are federal probationers, and the federal courthouse is on the other side of Cadman, much more than 100 yards away.

I was one of the people who initially thought this was a lot of hysterical, overcaffeinated NIMBYism, but when I actually saw the proximity of the facility to the school, children gamboling about among armed marshalls, it is a little alarming. In the city there will always be jarring juxtapositions, part of the fun of urban life, but when you have RL chase scenes during lower school pick-up, enough is enough.

Posted by: likes2lurk at September 26, 2008 6:59 PM

Okay, where to begin? I guess with the joke; "St. Annie get your gun" is pretty clever. Contiuing top to bottom, it's a federal facility so slick's reference to the city budget is irrelevant. And I disagree with pierre's geographic sense. One Pierrepont Plaza isn't "smack-dab in the middle of a family neighborhood;" it's on the edge of where a commercial corridor meets a residential neighborhood. statestreets 'love it or leave it' tone leaves something to be desired, but his/her basic point is sound. If you want highly separated land uses, suburbia will probably satisfy that need better than a large city. Brownstoner's reference to the school's request that a "Federal judge ... relocate the probation office to the courts" seems to have confused sam, who then infers that a judge put this facility in this building. In fact, the General Services Admistration (GSA) makes those kinds of decisions. And has been making those kinds of decisions about this particular facility for over thirty years--that is how long the probation office of the Eastern District of New York has been in commercial office buildings in Downtown Brooklyn. The reason the probation office has not been in the courthouse itself since the mid-70s is lack of space and despite the recent expansion of the federal court, space is still tight. Unless GSA violated laws or rules about the siting of these types of facilities, I do not see the federal government walking away from a multi-year lease and the money it spent on the build-out. Other strategies will probably need to be explored. What's a Ralph Lauren chase scene?

Posted by: g man at September 26, 2008 7:24 PM

How does a parolee escape? If he was on parole that would mean that he was already released from prison. Were they going to revoke his parole and return him to prison upon the completion of the interrogation?

Posted by: Chaka at September 26, 2008 7:37 PM

q man, first of all, you are confused if you think that the GSA does not kow-tow to federal judges. I know, I have been there, I have heard the judge say: "I need parking for myself and my staff and my senior secretary drives an SUV and can't parallel park, so give her a big space" ...or "these antique chandeliers are gloomy, get rid of them and give me something brighter ....or, hypothetically: "I want the parole facility to be a five minute walk from my chambers and I want it to be in Brooklyn Heights". Don't blame it on the GSA, they probably wanted something more practical.
But St Ann's parents are no slouches, they should turn on the pressure -big time- and they will get results. At the very least it will put the fed judges and the Courts on notice that there are real people living in the community and that they are not putting up with this brainless arrogance.

Posted by: sam at September 26, 2008 7:57 PM

Chaka:

"Were they going to revoke his parole and return him to prison upon the completion of the interrogation?"

Bingo!

Posted by: sam at September 26, 2008 7:59 PM

I know that Brownstoner uses the word "parolee" but federal criminals do not get parole. And yes, GSA explicitly looked for office space near the court. Officers and others travel frequently between the probation office and the court. I don't discount for a second the smarts, tenacity and social connections of St. Ann's parents but I do not think that relocating the probation facility is going to be the solution. Time will tell. Oh, and it's g man.

Posted by: g man at September 26, 2008 8:34 PM

q man, yeah, you know it all, and have all the answers,
thank you. we appreciate your self-certified sagacity.

Posted by: sam at September 26, 2008 8:56 PM

in a family neighborhood? Most neighborhoods are. It's the type of family yeah?

it's called COURT street for a reason. Toughen up or move. Why can't st ann's move?

I will say, in St. Anne's defense, I grew up in the city and I do recall the St. Anne's kids being pretty doughy and soft private school snowflakes. I hope their eyeballs are ok if they saw his go down.

Posted by: Pastabatman at September 27, 2008 10:04 AM

There are those who would put the welfare of criminals over that of chidren and who would like to see young families move to the suburbs. But in reality the suburbs have moved to Brooklyn and the old misanthropic class is being steadily outnumbered by, well, normal people.
A parole office should not be located next to a school, even in the "tough, mean" city (Brooklyn Heights?). the placement of the facility was a mistake. DGS will need to figure out who to move out and what to move in so as to rectify the situation, I'm sure no one in the federal courts system wants a repeat of what happened Thursday or worse. The sane need to prevail over the likes of pastaman and statestreeter.

Posted by: Inigo at September 27, 2008 12:25 PM

sam-i-am, I'd be happy to provide you with enough facts so you could certify for yourself that I actually am privy to more information on this topic than most people, but then I might as well post over my real name. Sagacity? I was modest enough to write "Time will tell," and indeed it will. I agree with several of the statements that Inigo makes above, including "the placement of the facility was a mistake" and "I'm sure no one in the federal courts system wants a repeat of what happened Thursday or worse." But I still don't think those sentiments are going to manifest in the probation office moving, short of someone proving that the feds did something illegal or improper. But time will tell, time will tell, time will tell.

Posted by: g man at September 27, 2008 12:56 PM

time will tell. sometimes politics and reputation actually trump real estate leases. the office will move, or at least move the interviewing of hardend criminals and sex offenders out. they had already promised the headmaster to move certain functions out during school hours, but surprise, they lied. if they are caught in a lie again, the consequences will escalate and the court could have to deal with a real public relations disaster. the parents should press hard and i believe they will prevail. youth can prevail over the old guard who may insist that this is the status quo, the way it has always been, and the way it shall remain. but nothing in brooklyn is what it was except for a diminishing number of longtime residents who refuse to keep up with the times.

Posted by: Inigo at September 27, 2008 1:30 PM

Inigo

Where does it go? Where are there not kids in NYC? Where? The docks? Are the people going to the this new location allowed to travel through Brooklyn Heights to get there? Or do they take the train to a non-kid area and then walk along the water front? Can they go near Ikea on the way? Is that allowed?

Can they be in Red hook? I've seen kids in Red Hook.

What is your plan? They go anywhere, just away from you?

Why can't St Anns go? Why not? It's downtown brooklyn by the courts.

Posted by: Pastabatman at September 27, 2008 4:22 PM

Pastaman:
you need to take your medication.
I think time has passed you by.


Posted by: Inigo at September 27, 2008 6:24 PM

Inigo, let's get real. Of course there are kids throughout Brooklyn. But to locate a facility like this right next to an established elementary school? C'mon. it's illegal to serve liquor within 200 feet of a school -- why should it be okay to put a federal probation facility cheek by jowl? furthermore, if anything i think the parents and administration at St. Ann's have created LESS of an uproar and received LESS attention than if this had been a public elementary school. This is not about rich Brooklyn Heights families -- not the sole source of the St. Ann's school body by the way -- (lots of rich Tribeca families too! And others less gifted financially who sacrifice for their kids to get an education here) -- in the end, this is about the safety of children. If this were a public elementary school i strongly doubt this kind of mistake would have been made. the cost / benefit analysis doesn't support this juxtoposition.

Posted by: Stoic at September 27, 2008 11:28 PM

Inigo, let's get real. Of course there are kids throughout Brooklyn. But to locate a facility like this right next to an established elementary school? C'mon. it's illegal to serve liquor within 200 feet of a school -- why should it be okay to put a federal probation facility cheek by jowl? furthermore, if anything i think the parents and administration at St. Ann's have created LESS of an uproar and received LESS attention than if this had been a public elementary school. This is not about rich Brooklyn Heights families -- not the sole source of the St. Ann's school body by the way -- (lots of rich Tribeca families too! And others less gifted financially who sacrifice for their kids to get an education here) -- in the end, this is about the safety of children. If this were a public elementary school i strongly doubt this kind of mistake would have been made. the cost / benefit analysis doesn't support this juxtoposition.

Posted by: Stoic at September 27, 2008 11:28 PM

Inigo, let's get real. Of course there are kids throughout Brooklyn. But to locate a facility like this right next to an established elementary school? C'mon. it's illegal to serve liquor within 200 feet of a school -- why should it be okay to put a federal probation facility cheek by jowl? furthermore, if anything i think the parents and administration at St. Ann's have created LESS of an uproar and received LESS attention than if this had been a public elementary school. This is not about rich Brooklyn Heights families -- not the sole source of the St. Ann's school body by the way -- (lots of rich Tribeca families too! And others less gifted financially who sacrifice for their kids to get an education here) -- in the end, this is about the safety of children. If this were a public elementary school i strongly doubt this kind of mistake would have been made. the cost / benefit analysis doesn't support this juxtoposition.

Posted by: Stoic at September 27, 2008 11:28 PM

Not long ago this post would have easily drawn 100+ comments right out of the gate.

What happened? Where did everyone go?

Posted by: White and Proud in PLG at September 28, 2008 10:15 AM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions