Hi Dave:

I'm planning to attend the meeting. Where, exactly, are the Tremont Pointe offices?

Sandy

The TP offices are located in the big building with the curved roof in the center of the complex, on the 490 side.

Thanx,

David

Called the Media

     Hello Dave, I forwarded this to the Plain Press. These are important issues. They should not have been swept under the rug. 

  What we really must find out is how Cimperman is benefiting from this? His campaign report is due at the end of the month should be fun.

  I think I will send a email to all my media friends. Good luck

Dave,

 I am a bit confused.  I attended several of the planning meetings for the Hope VI redevelopment of ValleyView.  As I recall we (residents of the Tremont neighborhood) were assured that security would be a priority within the new ValleyView.  Much was said about screening residents.  Much was said about how much of the project would be turned over to market rate housing. 

I was left with the impression that the bulk of the project would ultimately be for sale.  Something like 1/3 for sale at straight market rate.  1/3 would be for sale at some sort of discount if income levels were met, like what happens with former President Jimmy Carter's Habitat for Humanity homes.  It seemed only, at most, (the numbers shifted a bit), a 1/3 was to be fully subsided public housing rental units.

Are you saying that is not that case?

That the new ValleyView is in fact a roughly 200 unit rental unit project.  With no security plan being offered for review by the company that contracted with CMHA to manage the project?  What about the CMHA Police?  Surely they still have jurisdiction.

BFD123

Dave,

I must correct myself and apologize.  Apparently I misunderstood what was being presented to me in those public meetings regarding ValleyView all those years ago.  Your post prompted me to go to the CMHA website where I found the following description of the Valleyview Hope VI project

"The new Valleyview site will include 95 public housing units, 33 tax credit units, 62 market rate units and 24 new homes for sale. The demolition of this site will begin in June 2005 and the construction of the new units will begin in the spring of 2006."

Link in question:  http://www.cmha.net/hopevi/valleyviewhomes.aspx

Ok so we've got 95 fully subsidized unites, 33 "section 8" units (they aren't called that anymore but I forget the new name) and 62 market rate units.  Those are the rental units, total 190. 

I am guessing the "24 new homes" for sale, would be those townhouses going up on Starkweather between Thurman Alley and W7th.

Ok so what we are discussing is a 190 unit rental project.  1,2,&3 bedroom units.  I am assuming.  So lets assume, an average of 2 adults and one child per unit.  An absurd assumption I agree.  That's 380 adults, and 190 children.

So what you are telling me Dave, is that Tremont is in the process of giving birth to a RENTAL project that will house a total of roughly 570 individuals. And there is no plan in place for dealing with how the residents of this development will be kept safe and secure?

The mind boggles

bfd123

P.S. Dave, do we have any evidence that the units currently built and rented out actually reflect the numbers (percentages) noted on CMHA's website?

It sounds like you do your homework, you should get in contact with me: dave.purpera@gmail.com , I need some help getting some info together.

To answer your first question, no. The mix is different than what they originally told us at those early meetings due to funding and other variables, as I understand it. The security issues are not attached to the final plan. The current model absolves CMHA from policing duties, due to the fraction of market rate residents not being under the jurisdiction of CMHA. The whole project now falls under the 2nd District. 

The second district has been doing a fantastic job but could use some help, IMO

There are market rate tenants on the federal property that is Valley View/Tremont Pointe?

I went to some of the community planning meetings and found the disconnect between what was being said, what was understood by the audience and what was being demanded by some members of the Tremont community both intriguing and frightening.

The cash streams that provide for federally subsidized housing would seemingly preclude "market rate rentals" or "new housing for sale" within the federal project as the funding for the project is federal monies that subsidize a private developer/ private construction.  The "subsidized rents" pay for the financing that built the project. 

This is how we get big money (that can afford it) to take an interest in building housing for individuals that do not have enough money to afford housing.  Left to a "market driven economy" the homeless problem that would be created would cause those who otherwise don't care to care.  Only because we would be forced to see too many homeless people that we tend to (based on posts here) fear.  Federal housing keeps them off the streets and largely out of your way.

Nonetheless the frustration remains that Tremont residents want to believe that there would be brand new market houses within the federal housing project, which I do not see happening due to the financial structure of federal housing.

But I guess IF there was a compromise over the integrity of the project as not being strictly federal housing then CMHA could defer to the Municipal police force.  Interesting development I did not envison five years ago at those community meetings.

Thank you Dave for supporting the Cleveland Police and the job they do.

As for those who continue to attack and belittle the Cleveland Police I offer, apply to the academy and become a cadet and show us all how the job is done.

I'd rather work with them to improve our community then cause a rift by bashing them. 

We are all human (I think) and on any given day could be criticized.  For me some of the attacks posted here over the years seem nothing more than people wishing to complain rather than contribute.

However as we are all human, I guess what I experience as some people's complaining may just be their need to vent.

jb

The Cleveland Police Department is under-staffed and ill-equipped, simple as that. The streets of Cleveland are in complete disarray and being controlled by thugs, and there is nothing the police or anyone else can do about it... until we have proper staff and equipment. CPD is doing an incredibly AWESOME job for who and what they have. If adding police were as simple as applying to the academy, we wouldn't have a problem with being understaffed. I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that all the hoopla about the new cadets and added police is nothing more than political hype... for the most part, they've simply hired new police to replace retirees and others lost due to attrition.

I have been asked to note that my post is my personal opinion and not the position of TWDC and that there are a few who feel that "circumvented" was not the correct word to use;

cir·cum·vent (sûrkm-vnt)

tr.v. cir·cum·vent·ed, cir·cum·vent·ing, cir·cum·vents

1. To surround (an enemy, for example); enclose or entrap.

2. To go around; bypass: circumvented the city.

3. To avoid or get around by artful maneuvering: She planned a way to circumvent all the bureaucratic red tape.

-courtesy of thefreedictionary.com-

< - END DISCLAIMER - >

Now, for what we can all agree on:

Today @ 11am - Tremont Pointe Offices

We are meeting to discuss the need for -

Security, Cameras, Rec Facilities & a Tenants Council to address internal issues.

These items will have a direct impact on our neighborhood's safety and alleviate strain on our Police Department. Please attend if you are able.

I appreciate your support

David Purpera

Dave,

For what it is worth I didn't take your identifying yourself as a member of TWDC's Board as indicating that you were speaking for the Board.  Particularly given the fact that you seemed to be slamming the Board for dancing around it's own procedures and perhaps even buckling at the knees to a councilman's strong arming his own agenda.  Alas what do I know, heck I didn't even realize circumvent also meant to surround. 

Who knew?  That can't be common usage though.  "We circumvented the castle and laid siege."  No that doesn't sound right.  Oh well I'll look it up later.

Back to the matter at hand, a 190 unit rental development which apparently has no security plan in place for its residents.  Recreational facilities would seem to be logical need too.  I can't quite imagine a fully commercial rental project of that scale going to market without offering its perspective costumers both security and recreation.  At least not in today's market, sure 10, 20 years ago, maybe.  Though I guess when the vast majority of your potential market is captive anyway what you offer in terms of services really doesn't matter. 

Now however, having thought about it a bit more, I am wondering just what is the role of the councilman and TWDC in this anyway?  Isn't Hope VI a federal government HUD program and isn't McCormick Baron Salazar (sic?) a Boston based national real estate development and management firm?  I get, CMHA being cut out at this point, private management of public housing, better, worse, who knows, why not give it a shot.  But really what use is TWDC and Joe Cimmperman in this? 

I get the theory behind Hope VI, instead of isolating the poor and disenfranchised off into isolated ghettos (actual definition of ghetto here not simply ghetto = slum definition) where the culture of poverty replicates and breeds itself.  Mix them in with the various other economic classes in the "hope" of breaking the cycle of poverty.  Given that the experiment is only about 10-15 yrs old nationwide, data on its' success failure is inconclusive.  I would think it would logically follow that one would also offer the same security and recreational opportunities one would offer at a completely commercial market rate project.  Then again I am a bear of very small brain. 

bfd123

Side note to JB.  I once referenced Charles Dickens to a Rush L. "ditto head" in a discussion over public housing in general.  The response I got was, "well Dickens painted a rather dreary picture of his times".  With that statement in mind, I am not sure pointing out that without public housing we'd be stepping over the homeless in the streets is going move the conversation.  At least it didn't work for me in that conversation.

Just another example of honest citizens behing hood-winked. 

We were repeatedly told that security would be provided, that our fears were unfounded.

It was hinted at that we were racist, because obviously if we do not want Section 8 in our community it means we do not like black people (an absurd contention).

It was alleged that we wanted to continue a policy of isolating the poor into ghettos, that we are a bunch of heartless bastards.

As I've said before, no matter what side of the pendulum you are on, everyone agrees that there is a direct correlation between crime and poverty (although I think many immigrants of the early 20th century might disagree). 

By introducing more poverty into a community, you are not going to be doing any "uplifting".  Instead, all you will do is bring the surrounding area down.  The schools get worse, the community gets less safe, and the general welfare of the area decreases.  While I know this is not the most politically correct thing to say, it is the sad reality. 

If you do not agree with me, I would recommend asking long-time residents of South Euclid, Lakewood, Cleveland Heights, and Slavic Village what started the downturn in their communities. 

Also, I have 2 friends who were idealistic/stupid enough to rent an apartment at Tremont Pointe.  Here were some of their observations:

1) they have no idea who their neighbors are, for there are so many people continually coming in and out of the apartment.

2) they have repeatedly called management over the noise, which continues until un-godly hours

3) they want the hell out as soon as possible

BFD123 said,

"Given that the experiment is only about 10-15 yrs old nationwide, data on its' success failure is inconclusive."

Maybe I am alone, but I would prefer they NOT experiment with my community.  We are the ones who are going to suffer if the experiment does not work.  Oh well, at least they are experimenting with Tremont and not Westlake.   

THANKS JOE!!! 

Photo's of Interest.

     Review the link below. You may need to join this group to review the picture files.

    I think it will reveille some interesting perspective about Councilman Cimperman . There are some pictures from a political fundraiser in Tremont on 05-22-08 for a current Trustee and Officer that sits on the Board of TWDC. It is my understanding this Officer voted for the Cimperman brokered deal for Phase II.

   People in Tremont must really educate themselves on these political matters. After all "We the People" in 2006 voted a "Strip Club Manager" and a Convicted Felon in Florida to be the President of TWDC. We should have written in "Sweet Polly Purebred".  Just how much money did she raise for Councilman Cimperman? Could we say that Cimperman works the Taxpayer's Brass Pole? Just how many local developers put the big bills in his garter belt after the favors are done?

  We really need to find out if the allegations about free vacations tied in to Phase I are true and who benefited? I hope Carl Monday is serious about this.

  Just who is the real puppet master, well its Joe Cimperman. He is Cleveland's own Monte Hall. "Lets Make a Deal". You can see him on stage at BOZA, BBS, Planning, or even the Landmarks Commission. You should of seen him two weeks ago and how many strings he was pulling on. You could actually see Robert Brown and Ron O'Leary's mouths move when Joe was tugging away at his failed attempt to get someone's house torn down.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tremonttruthquest/

filippo7, you might be interested in reading "American Murder Mystery" in the July 2008 Atlantic Monthly online.  http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/memphis-crime

Although a much dryer read; Mixed Income Housing, Myth and Fact.  http://www.uli.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=41896&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm  Yep very pro hope VI projects.

A more balanced look... Mixed Income Housing Developments: Promise and Reality  http://www.knowledgeplex.org/showdoc.html?id=4961

google and a varied taste in reading materials is a bad combination. 

"Cimperman works the Taxpayer's Brass Pole"

you are my new hero, Henry!

:::::laughing my @ss off for the weekend!:::::::

Thank you Dave 

jb

Great Work Dave,

          Dave you need to be commended for your efforts in spear-heading the activism in moving this forward. I wonder if they would sign some sort of co-operative agreement with a time-frame that would also be signed by Cimperman?

'Photo's of Interest.

Review the link below. You may need to join this group to review the picture files.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tremonttruthques"

heheh, yah like im going to join one of yogi & guys conspiracy websites thats disguised as a community forum.

credibility = 0

Joe's skills on the brass pole aside;

The meeting went extremely well! We had several board members, residents, Merrick house, the Plain Press, TP management and others. We agreed on most points and have the green light to seek funding for Security Cameras and a Tenant's Council will be formed this month with Renee Richardson as the chair. We also acknowledged the need to explore an on site security solution and the basketball court request. 

Thank you for your support, the residents in attendance and to the members of TWDC who pushed hard to make this possible. 

I will continue to aggressively push for the on site security and camera funding, please contine to support this initiative.

Thanks again,

David Purpera