| Author |
Message |
    
fringe
Citizen
Username: Fringe
Post Number: 754
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 8:52 am: | 
|
From the News-Record of 27 January
We must do more to attract minorities to civic life by Meredith Sue Willis
The Trustees of the South Orange/Maplewood Community Coalition on Race, an organization that works to make our two towns a community of choice for all races, has prepared a statement on the ordinances passed recently by the towns of Maplewood and South Orange. The trustees, a group that is racially representative of our community, spent several sessions discussing and weighing many issues and viewpoints before coming to the following consensus statement, which was adopted at our Dec.16, 2004 meeting.
The trustees of the South Orange Maplewood Coalition on Race, like other citizens of the two towns, understand that our limited local resources should be used to educate children who reside in South Orange and Maplewood. The two towns have now passed ordinances to counter landlord practices that support what is called in legal terminology “theft of services” from the school district. We believe the new ordinances are likely to have an impact on the schools and housing market that increases racial integration. The Coalition has already taken a position in the year 2000 in favor of town enforcement directed against code and zoning violations that might result in dangerously and illegally crowded dwellings. Further, we fully support legally proper cooperation between the school district and the towns to enforce ordinances.
However, there are complex and challenging issues inherent in these new ordinances. For example, while we believe the ordinances may be racially pro-integrative in the area of housing and schools, we are strongly concerned that, in the absence of mitigating strategies, they may have the opposite impact on civic life. It is possible some people of color will see the ordinances as aimed at reducing the number of children of color in our schools. It is possible they will feel shut out and withdraw from participation in the civic life of our communities.
We at the coalition and other local organizations and institutions, should be redoubling our efforts to attract people of color to civic life, especially to the governing bodies. Their boards and committees should emphasize and devote additional resources to closing the racial academic achievement gap and to other vital issues related to race, equality and integration.
|
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 3880
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 9:00 am: |
|
Why did you post this? |
LibraryLady(ncjanow)
Supporter
Username: Librarylady
Post Number: 2156
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 9:03 am: |
|
Probably for the same reasons anybody posts anything. To see the reaction. |
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7470
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 9:11 am: |
|
I think there was some criticism that the CCR didn't take a position on this when the ordinances were first proposed. I think the leader, and maybe the only member, of that group was Fringe.
Obviously the statement is a compromise because it supports the ordinance, but warns of possible unexpected consequences.
|
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 3812
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
|
I'm afraid to ask, but what were the ordinances?
|
e roberts
Citizen
Username: Wnwd00
Post Number: 294
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 11:21 am: |
|
i dont know if the feelings of minority groups or basically anyone should be a concern here. this is a health and welfare ordinance with a purpose of ensuring that all people live in a safe dwelling. if an a truly unsafe dwelling is found then it will be condemed or at least temporarily closed until necessary repairs are made.
i do not care about hurtings someones feelings if they live in an unsafe situation it needs to be stopped. |
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7473
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 11:25 am: |
|
I think the specific ordinances the CCR is commenting on are the ones establishing penalties for landlords who sign false residence affidavits or supply false lease information for the purpose of registering children in our schools. |
e roberts
Citizen
Username: Wnwd00
Post Number: 295
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 8:21 pm: |
|
i was under the impression they were related to living conditions and that type of issue. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 709
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 8:52 pm: |
|
Maybe because the News Record is read by 1,000 maplewoodians mainly for high school sports.
And because it will be read by 500 readers on MOL, most of whom are movers and shakers in their own groups and who will be discussing this issue, the CCR, home safety and fireman safety.
|
Mayor McCheese
Citizen
Username: Mayor_mccheese
Post Number: 147
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 4, 2005 - 1:13 am: |
|
Reflective
Not just the sports. Also the police blotter. That can be a good read sometimes. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 717
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 4, 2005 - 10:33 pm: |
|
Thanks Mayor, but what can we do to educate Dunkie, who keeps asking inane questions?
Duncan - why did you ask that?
So there!!!!!! |
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 4885
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 9:59 am: |
|
A better question might be why CCR would consider the building code violation ordinace and the legal action against residents falsely stating that a SO/M student is legally resident in their home ordinance as having a potential negative impact on civic participation of persons in one or more protected classes.
If these actions by our two towns result in members of one or more protected class feeling that the ordinances will impact negatively on them or other members of their protected class, then this should encourage such persons to take a more active civic role in our towns to work for change from within the system, especially in towns such as ours which are so welcoming of such participation and offer so many opportunities for inclusion. |
Mayor McCheese
Citizen
Username: Mayor_mccheese
Post Number: 157
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 9, 2005 - 12:51 pm: |
|
Does anyone remember a time when CCR was just a band? |
Cynicalgirl
Citizen
Username: Cynicalgirl
Post Number: 1112
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 9, 2005 - 12:58 pm: |
|
Me!
Do-do-do lookin' out my back door.... |
Lydia
Citizen
Username: Lydial
Post Number: 910
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 9, 2005 - 6:22 pm: |
|
This is sort of confusing. The CCR says they support enforcing our town ordinances - that I get.
Then I infer the CCR is implying people who enrollnon-resident students are mostly minorities who may or may not choose not to participate in civic affairs if the ordinances are enforced.
Huh?
It would seem to me that people who are renting (of any race) are less likely to participate in volunteer jobs because they have less money and time to contribute. If students are enrolled in our schools and are not residents, then I would think the heads of the household are trying to stay beneath the radar and not make themselves too visible in the community.
Helping people become homeowners encourages community participation.
Vaguely discouraging code enforcement exacerbates the problem IMO.
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4318
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 9, 2005 - 10:26 pm: |
|
I think you may have mis-interpreted the CCR statement. |
fringe
Citizen
Username: Fringe
Post Number: 776
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 12, 2005 - 8:05 am: |
|
The CCR concludes its letter by stating that local groups should increase efforts to, among other things, close the achievement gap. The gap in this district was first documented in November 1997 by a joint citizen/administration committee that Super H disbanded shortly after his arrival in Spring 1998. Since then the gap has increased based on dissaggregated scores on the NJ test battery.
How does the CCR view the efforts of BOE incumbent candidates O'Leary and Jasey to close this gap? (see the Achievement Gap link at http://hometown.aol.com/njfabian ) |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page