Yeah, it's sad, believe me Missy
When you're born to be a sissy
Without the vim and verve
But I could show my prowess
Be a lion, not a mowess
If I only had the nerve
("If I Only Had a Brain," from The Wizard of Oz)
Ah, where's Bert Lahr when you need him?
Last night the Council held its long-delayed vote on the two current ARHA board vacancies, and their actions were, to say the least, remarkable.
Because there were two openings (one due to the retirement of Ruby Tucker and one to the expiration of Melvin Miller's term), the Council decided to mark up two ballots. Each ballot included the names of all seven candidates.
The first ballot to fill Ruby Tucker's slot was straightforward. Derek Hyra, a Cameron Station Democrat and an academic with expertise in HUD programs and policies, won six votes while Deborah Harris captured one vote, that of Councilman Ludwig Gaines. Dr. Hyra was appointed.
Good move.
But with the second critical ballot for Melvin Miller's position, the acting City Attorney announced that no candidate had attained the necessary minimum of four votes. So Council decided to defer making an appointment for another two to five months, leaving Melvin Miller in his place while the City advertises his post again.
What's significant about the length of the delay?
The Council can now arrange it so the position won't be filled until after the election in May.
Slick.
That's not all, folks. When Councilman Gaines asked the acting City Attorney to declare the detailed results for the second ballot, citing public interest, it turns out there was only a single vote cast: Mr. Gaines' vote for Mr. Miller.
The Mayor and five other Council members abstained from voting for any of the candidates. Can you say collusion?
After this Churchillian decision, Councilman Rob Krupicka once again took the podium to wax about affordable housing, about what a wonderful ARHA CEO Roy Priest is turning out to be, and about a possible change in ARHA's board size, and ...
Put a sock in it already, will ya?
One quasi-heartening fact: the Council for the first time is too fearful of voters in this community to once again hand Mr. Miller the burnished keys to the public housing kingdom. Just a few years ago they would have brushed us off and moved ahead to anoint him but they didn't. That represents a vote of no confidence (of a sort) in Mr. Miller.
Nevertheless, our fearless leaders left Mr. Miller in place as chairman until the next go-round, so they can't be too displeased with his performance.
What remains to be seen is whether Council will take the potentially despicable route of postponing the appointment until after the election and then slipping Mr. Miller back into his comfortable old place. But nothing would surprise the Growler.
Toto, we're certainly not in Kansas any more — now cue those flying monkeys!
27 comments:
"That's not all, folks. When Councilman Gaines asked the acting City Attorney to declare the detailed results for the second ballot, citing public interest, it turns out there was only a single vote cast: Mr. Gaines' vote for Mr. Miller."
Well, that says it all about Krupicka and Wilson, doesnt it. Not one of his joker supporters better show up on this blog again.
I wish I could abstain from having my lawn littered on.
No matter. I have my answer. Their actions are as good as voting for Miller as far as I'm concerned.
So....I'll be attending the caucus and voting against ALL of them. Then, I'm going to support each Republican in the general election. Rules be damned.
I must say, this vote (or failure to vote) was the topic du jour at our neighborhood Starbucks this morning.
What's up with this?
Are they hoping to reach some sort of compromise? In other words, create more seats on the ARHA Board so they can give Miller a seat, but then dilute his power with real commissioners?
They are having a candidates debate prior to the election. Perhaps the strategy should be to show up and ask each candidate to name the individual he or she would vote for in the Miller spot?
I've already ask these "strong as wet toilet paper" council members if they'll vote for Miller. Their answers have been: "Well, the problem has been getting a candidate that is strong and can offer..." . Leading us back to square one. Convincing them that they WILL loose their cushioned seat at council if they vote for Miller. I think the vote last night means they heard Parker-Gray and were, at least a little, scared. I encourage everyone to show up at the Democratic caucus to do what another poster has suggested. Let's show them that they're not the only ones who can manhandle the system.
"Well, that says it all about Krupicka and Wilson, doesnt it."
Just what exactly have the Hardy boys done? Krupicka asked us not to upset his applecart by requesting off siting for Bland because well because. But of course we can plan for it later especially Madden and Adkins. Pleeaassee! Only after a gaggle hits city hall on a Saturday is the formula for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund appropriately amended. It's a shame the Council has permitted ARHA to become a personality issue. It is a management issue pure and simple. And Priest is not their saviour in waiting! His Gazette Packet article the quotes were pathetic. He says Chatham Square is a sociological success yet Hamer claims it is not. So we get mixed income and higher density at Bland. This action is a cover up for ARHA's mismanagement upzoning to save ARHA's balance sheet. These dumb buzzards need to pay at the voting booth. But do I want ARHA's Ring ring-leading his fellow Republicans or do I want Walker (hell, no) and Donley instead? Anybody else reaching for the Excedrin?
Notwithstanding the mayor, I don't believe the Council lacks a brain. Only courage.
Maybe Council delayed this because they DIDN'T want to reappoint Miller and knew that when he was voted out, they'd face the wrath of Lenny, etc. So, they decided to delay until after the election.
NOT reappointing Miller is so clearly the right thing to do, given the current state of ARHA and the redevelopment opportunities ahead. Maybe this is their cowardly way of achieving it w/o having to deal with pre-election screaming and race baiting?
Race baiting? I thought all that was a thing of the past with Obama being elected.
There is an article on the Local Kicks website regarding the new sex shop on King. It seems as if the building's previous owner (the Orvis guy who was treated so shabbily by the City) has gotten sweet revenge!!
The mayor is quoted as saying the shop is inappropriate and that he'd rather have an ice cream shop.
Hahahahahahahah!! I LOVE that this new shop has stuck it to our simple mayor. Never mind the fact that there are already THREE freakin ice cream shops in a one block radius, but what ever happened to Old Town being a liberal, open, and caring community??? I guess that only applies if you're a minority, criminal, drug addict, homeless, or handicapped. This situation is SO damn funny.
"Race baiting? I thought all that was a thing of the past with Obama being elected."
Are you kidding? I just got screamed at last week by some crazy man who was mad that "white people" have moved into a "black neighborhood". Specifically, I was told I dont belong and should move out immediately. I say crazy because he was also screaming at the people in LA Boxing and at passing cars.
I am sure he will probably be Mayor Euille's choice to lead the Braddock East Implementation Group.
"Are they hoping to reach some sort of compromise? In other words, create more seats on the ARHA Board so they can give Miller a seat, but then dilute his power with real commissioners?"
That would require one of the council members to actually have a plan....most of them just look at slides and say "wow, thats wonderful" That kind of scheme is beyond their thinking.
"They are having a candidates debate prior to the election. Perhaps the strategy should be to show up and ask each candidate to name the individual he or she would vote for in the Miller spot?"
Like when candidates were asked if they supported Resolution 830? Do you remember their answers to that?
"It's a shame the Council has permitted ARHA to become a personality issue."
Its not a personality issue. Its a racial issue (in their minds). They have essentially turned ARHA into the representative of low-income African Americans in Alexandria. Anyone who attacks ARHA is essentially framed as someone attacking poor black people.
What they are afraid of is the response of Harris and others if they repudiate this long-standing relationship.
"Maybe Council delayed this because they DIDN'T want to reappoint Miller and knew that when he was voted out, they'd face the wrath of Lenny, etc. So, they decided to delay until after the election."
From my understanding, Lenny and Melvin dont exactly get along that great. My understanding is Harris has an organization that serve low-income residents. So he is more a defender of low-income residents than ARHA. His fear is anything that gets people out of poverty, since his organization might suffer if he had less clientele to cater to.
Seriously, I cant see any other motive for him keeping people in squalor.
"The mayor is quoted as saying the shop is inappropriate and that he'd rather have an ice cream shop."
And I would rather have just a shop in my neighborhood Mister Mayor. But anytime a shop opens on Queen St or the Inner City its got to shut down because its robbed.
I wonder if we all stood outside this evening and just started shooting our guns in the air whether they might listen.
Since, you know, I am "street" and thats all they seem to respond to.
Hey they are probably just busy with the plan for revitalizaing Landmark:
Oh wait:
"Once again a plan to redevelop Landmark Mall and a vast area of Alexandria's West End was put on hold Tuesday night, Jan. 6, by the Alexandria Planning Commission. After three hours of staff presentations and testimony from 17 public speakers, the commission voted unanimously to defer action on the Landmark/Van Dorn Corridor Plan.
"
http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=324135&paper=59&cat=104
I wonder if the Arlington Board would "abstain".
I know they didn't "abstain" when Arlington overwhelmingly voted down the idea of a public housing authority.
Oh god no, just think if Miller stays and HUD reinstates 1-1.
"However, when HUD repealed its one-for-one rule, Alexandria kept the requirement. Now HUD is considering reestablishing its one-for-one rule, according to Priest."
anyone consider that they just didn't have a viable candidate yet?
"anyone consider that they just didn't have a viable candidate yet?"
Yes I did consider that. And I think you are probably right.
The irony is I dont think Miller is a viable candidate at all. I think he is an incompetent.
For all the hand-wringing, they did essentially repudiate Miller.
He couldn't get a single vote, except from Gaines (who is more famous for trash cans than legislative achievement).
Not one vote. No one.
To me thats a powerful message that its time to go. Now he just has to listen.
"Oh god no, just think if Miller stays and HUD reinstates 1-1."
Look, I don't care if HUD reinstates 1-1. We have that requirment already and it's not going anywhere.
What I DO care about is that they not dump them all back into one place. Quite literally, nearly every expert on the subject says concentrated poverty is bad.
It's a disgrace that we have Bland, Adkins, etc. crammed into this neighborhood (with Chatham nearby and not to mention all the Sec. 8 properties such as Tancil, Olde Towne, etc.)
So keep your public housing units. Just SPREAD THEM OUT. Please. Otherwise, what's the point? I mean, really. It does NOBODY any good. In fact, we know from objective research that it actively harms people.
I think it's a good sign that Miller is not back on the ARHA Board. In fact, it's the only positive thing I've seen from Council on the public housing front. The Bland project is a disgrace - that they're redumping so many units back there. They should be ashamed of themselves.
"I think it's a good sign that Miller is not back on the ARHA Board."
He is still there for the next 2-5 months....
I've thought about the Miller vote and wonder if Vice Chairman Ring understands that it's a wake-up call to the Board to curtail its support of Miller's rather peculiar leadership. I have never understood how public housing can rightfully be dispersed in advance of the Bland project (Quaker Hill and Chatham Square)then remain an in tact "community" here in Braddock. The hypocrisy leaves me speechless. If the next issue is one of candidate choice perhaps some political thought should be given to how such Board candidates are vetted with the community. Hopefully the Council does not expect us to always follow Chatham Square's self-interested lead. They've drawn Braddock willy nilly into the parking issue for godsakes!
Six no-confidence votes on Miller?Methinks some Council members are starting to see a glimmer of light from where their heads have been stuck for so long.
But then, this Council is known for failing to follow through on its promises to Parker Gray.
Most importantly, to prevent getting another Miller type, who is the best person available to steer ARHA in a better direction?
"Most importantly, to prevent getting another Miller type, who is the best person available to steer ARHA in a better direction?"
Unfortunately, WE are. I think from now on this neighborhood needs to keep its eye on ARHA (attending its board meetings, etc.) and speaking up (both to ARHA and Council) when things are not as they should be.
ARHA has been getting away with crap for too long. And Council has not been held accountable.
Both those things must change. I think we're off to a very good start.
Post a Comment