Paper Box Responsibility
I read in the Star Tribune today that the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis have been negotiating about placement and operation of paper boxes on our streets. If you come to the corner of 38th Street and 23rd Ave S you will see some big offenders. The free boxes are continuously open with papers getting strewn over the entire neighborhood and caught up in the Nile Health Care chain link fence. And they have graffiti all over them is just as bad. And if you go up and down 38th you'll see the same thing. I believe if they can't clean up their garbage act, maintain them properly or remove the graffiti in a timely manner they should be removed completely. I reported graffiti on a Star Tribune Box on 38th weeks ago and it is still there. What amazes me even more is that someone loads that thing with papers every day and not once has there been an effort to clean up the graffiti. This is part of what I believe is a culture of "inner city thinking" in both government and corporate leadership in our city. Somehow an "inner city look" is just acceptable and we become immune to fighting the deterioration. How about some civic responsibility Star Tribune? Please clean up your act in our neighborhoods. Russell W. Peterson Ward 9 Standish R U S S E L L P E T E R S O N D E S I G N "You can only fly if you stretch your wings." Russell W. Peterson, RA, CID Founder 3857 23rd Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55407 612-724-2331 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Paper Box Responsibility
i know we have been over this graffiti thing again and again, but graffiti on a newspaper box is not "part of what I believe is a culture of 'inner city thinking' in both government and corporate leadership in our city," as mr peterson says, it is graffiti on a newspaper box. if we want to talk about something really trivial, lets discuss the thousands of children sleeping in homeless shelters in this city every night. Where is the leadership on that issue? mark wilde windom park __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/
RE: Paper Box Responsibility
Mr. Wilde said: I think you are completely wrong. Paying attention to the small details can reveal a larger kind of thinking. If someone as big as the Star Tribune just leaves it's stuff in the streets to look junky, then it is contributing to the "inner city look." Multiply that over thousands and thousands of locations and with other companies and it begins to wear down the soul. There is a huge psychological value to creating a great looking city that respects itself. I don't really think I deserved this snide remark. Homeless children is an appropriate issue. Why don't you post more about it instead of demeaning someone else's issue. Apparently, Mr. Wilde knows nothing about my background, I've helped create hundreds of units of housing for homeless people, what have you done Mr. Wilde? And part of that effort was to create "respectable housing that promotes self-respect." There isn't any reason we can't do that city wide. And cleaning up the graffiti, fixing our streets, picking up the trash, reducing airplane noise, painting and repairing buildings, etc. is all part of a bigger picture to help us think more highly of ourselves. I've seen it happen in neighborhoods. One neighbor moves in, plants a tree and some flowers. Than another catches the virus and pretty soon the whole area looks better and ultimately people feel better about themselves. In a larger scheme, I believe that if people can get self-respect back, then perhaps they aren't as likely to become homeless again. It is part of solving the homeless problem. Russ Peterson Ward 9 Standish R U S S E L L P E T E R S O N D E S I G N "You can only fly if you stretch your wings." Russell W. Peterson, RA, CID Founder 3857 23rd Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55407 612-724-2331 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Paper Box Responsibility
I thought I was the lone voice in the wilderness - but I too think this obsession with graffiti is pointless. In fact - I've even seen some graffiti I've rather liked. I guess some see it as a slippery slope; I see it as a fine line. I do agree that the defacement of every flat surfaced object in public is a nuisance, but I would rather spend my "civic duty" energy on education, feeding the hungry etc. But hey, whatever . D. Klein Kenwood - Original Message - From: "Mark Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 11:48 AM Subject: Re: Paper Box Responsibility > i know we have been over this graffiti thing again and > again, but graffiti on a newspaper box is not "part of > what I believe is a culture of 'inner city thinking' > in both government and corporate leadership in our > city," as mr peterson says, it is graffiti on a > newspaper box. > > if we want to talk about something really trivial, > lets discuss the thousands of children sleeping in > homeless shelters in this city every night. Where is > the leadership on that issue? > > mark wilde > windom park > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. > http://im.yahoo.com/ >
RE: Paper Box Responsibility
D. Klein writes: >I thought I was the lone voice in the wilderness - but I too think this >obsession with graffiti is pointless. In fact - I've even seen some >graffiti I've rather liked. I guess some see it as a slippery slope; I see >it as a fine line. I do agree that the defacement of every flat surfaced >object in public is a nuisance, but I would rather spend my "civic duty" >energy on education, feeding the hungry etc. But hey, whatever . I'll admit, as one of the anti-graffiti maniacs you critique, that I've wondered why I feel so strongly about it myself. (Jordan Kurschner wondered the same thing at the last Mpls-issues gathering, and I'll admit, talking to a guy who defends the powerless, it does make you a little sheepish...) I'll be honest and admit one reason: anal-retentiveness. While not quite Jack Nicholson in "As Good As It Gets," I have my moments. It really is, on some level, a very visible psychological crime. People in my area take great pride in the neighborhood's appearance, and some little punk has the arrogance to put something that'll stick in our face for days, or, given the city's cleaning speed, weeks. We're not talking out-of-the-way walls or free underpasses, either -- more like stone walls, nice planters, public street signs (including Stop signs, where it gets a little dangerous). Since I know business owners who've spent hundreds or even thousands to clean this crap up, I call it visual burglary, like ripping money out of someone's till. But the other thing is does -- and I think this is very important -- is that it creates a minor depression, a sagging. We all respond to visual stimuli, and sorry, most graffiti is NOT good-looking. It takes a lot of energy to keep a community healthy, especially public or openly private spaces where we all must accomodate others' needs. Seeing some arrogant jerk's work -- a visual f-u to that community spirit -- takes a little wind out of you, and over time, can take more, which leads to worse things. That said, is graffiti the biggest problem facing Mpls? No, but. Like Russ, I do a lot of other civic things that I hope are more important. But even if I don't, for many of us, this is a wrong we can see, and live with in our everyday lives. (Yes, this is a function of living in a nice area where larger social problems aren't as visible.) I don't blame anyone for taking it on. It's the folks who don't do squat about ANY social problem that I would criticize. In a perfect world, would I pick a grafitti-obliterated landscape where everyone gets a great education and a fully belly? Sure. But trust me, the larger social problems you see -- education, hunger, etc. -- also have massively more energy directed at them. The city's response to graffiti has been puny -- most of the energy you feel attacking it is precisely because nothing (other than empty words, for the most part) has been done. Anyway, it's a quandry I continue to think about, as I straighten the papers on my desk into neat little piles. Best, David Brauer King Field - Ward 10
Re: Paper Box Responsibility
Unlike David, I have never been accused of anal retentiveness. However, I'm now cleaning the brick pillars in my fence line for the third time since I bought the house three years ago. It's a pain in the neck to clean off and takes a lot of time. I feel like I'm not allowed to have this really nice fence just because some snot-nosed punk can buy a can of spray paint. My fence is on Lake Street. I feel ghettoized when I get sprayed again and again. Wizard Marks, Central David Brauer wrote: > D. Klein writes: > > >I thought I was the lone voice in the wilderness - but I too think this > >obsession with graffiti is pointless. In fact - I've even seen some > >graffiti I've rather liked. I guess some see it as a slippery slope; I > see > >it as a fine line. I do agree that the defacement of every flat surfaced > >object in public is a nuisance, but I would rather spend my "civic duty" > >energy on education, feeding the hungry etc. But hey, whatever . > > I'll admit, as one of the anti-graffiti maniacs you critique, that I've > wondered why I feel so strongly about it myself. (Jordan Kurschner wondered > the same thing at the last Mpls-issues gathering, and I'll admit, talking to > a guy who defends the powerless, it does make you a little sheepish...) > > I'll be honest and admit one reason: anal-retentiveness. While not quite > Jack Nicholson in "As Good As It Gets," I have my moments. > > It really is, on some level, a very visible psychological crime. People in > my area take great pride in the neighborhood's appearance, and some little > punk has the arrogance to put something that'll stick in our face for days, > or, given the city's cleaning speed, weeks. We're not talking out-of-the-way > walls or free underpasses, either -- more like stone walls, nice planters, > public street signs (including Stop signs, where it gets a little > dangerous). > > Since I know business owners who've spent hundreds or even thousands to > clean this crap up, I call it visual burglary, like ripping money out of > someone's till. But the other thing is does -- and I think this is very > important -- is that it creates a minor depression, a sagging. We all > respond to visual stimuli, and sorry, most graffiti is NOT good-looking. It > takes a lot of energy to keep a community healthy, especially public or > openly private spaces where we all must accomodate others' needs. Seeing > some arrogant jerk's work -- a visual f-u to that community spirit -- takes > a little wind out of you, and over time, can take more, which leads to worse > things. > > That said, is graffiti the biggest problem facing Mpls? No, but. Like Russ, > I do a lot of other civic things that I hope are more important. But even if > I don't, for many of us, this is a wrong we can see, and live with in our > everyday lives. (Yes, this is a function of living in a nice area where > larger social problems aren't as visible.) I don't blame anyone for taking > it on. It's the folks who don't do squat about ANY social problem that I > would criticize. > > In a perfect world, would I pick a grafitti-obliterated landscape where > everyone gets a great education and a fully belly? Sure. But trust me, the > larger social problems you see -- education, hunger, etc. -- also have > massively more energy directed at them. The city's response to graffiti has > been puny -- most of the energy you feel attacking it is precisely because > nothing (other than empty words, for the most part) has been done. > > Anyway, it's a quandry I continue to think about, as I straighten the papers > on my desk into neat little piles. > > Best, > David Brauer > King Field - Ward 10
RE: Paper Box Responsibility
You think that is bad, today I was out visiting busineses on Hennepin Avenue and discovered that everyone oif our new pedestrian light standards, which we haven't even turned on yet, had been stickered by a record company. Of course I pulled off a sticker and went to Oarfolk on 26th and Lyndale to see if I could find an address for this company so we can issue a ticket. The owner of the shop asked me why I didn't have better things to do with my time and I said well how would you feel as a business owner if you had just paid for these light fixtures or if you had to pay extra taxes to clean it up. He thought I should get a life. I'ts really hard to want to improve the neighborhood when folks think vandalism is okay. Lisa McDonald Tenth Ward Council Member > -Original Message- > From: wizardmarks [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 3:17 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Paper Box Responsibility > > Unlike David, I have never been accused of anal retentiveness. However, > I'm now > cleaning the brick pillars in my fence line for the third time since I > bought > the house three years ago. It's a pain in the neck to clean off and takes > a lot > of time. I feel like I'm not allowed to have this really nice fence just > because some snot-nosed punk can buy a can of spray paint. My fence is on > Lake > Street. I feel ghettoized when I get sprayed again and again. > Wizard Marks, Central > > David Brauer wrote: > > > D. Klein writes: > > > > >I thought I was the lone voice in the wilderness - but I too think this > > >obsession with graffiti is pointless. In fact - I've even seen some > > >graffiti I've rather liked. I guess some see it as a slippery slope; > I > > see > > >it as a fine line. I do agree that the defacement of every flat > surfaced > > >object in public is a nuisance, but I would rather spend my "civic > duty" > > >energy on education, feeding the hungry etc. But hey, whatever . > > > > I'll admit, as one of the anti-graffiti maniacs you critique, that I've > > wondered why I feel so strongly about it myself. (Jordan Kurschner > wondered > > the same thing at the last Mpls-issues gathering, and I'll admit, > talking to > > a guy who defends the powerless, it does make you a little sheepish...) > > > > I'll be honest and admit one reason: anal-retentiveness. While not quite > > Jack Nicholson in "As Good As It Gets," I have my moments. > > > > It really is, on some level, a very visible psychological crime. People > in > > my area take great pride in the neighborhood's appearance, and some > little > > punk has the arrogance to put something that'll stick in our face for > days, > > or, given the city's cleaning speed, weeks. We're not talking > out-of-the-way > > walls or free underpasses, either -- more like stone walls, nice > planters, > > public street signs (including Stop signs, where it gets a little > > dangerous). > > > > Since I know business owners who've spent hundreds or even thousands to > > clean this crap up, I call it visual burglary, like ripping money out of > > someone's till. But the other thing is does -- and I think this is very > > important -- is that it creates a minor depression, a sagging. We all > > respond to visual stimuli, and sorry, most graffiti is NOT good-looking. > It > > takes a lot of energy to keep a community healthy, especially public or > > openly private spaces where we all must accomodate others' needs. Seeing > > some arrogant jerk's work -- a visual f-u to that community spirit -- > takes > > a little wind out of you, and over time, can take more, which leads to > worse > > things. > > > > That said, is graffiti the biggest problem facing Mpls? No, but. Like > Russ, > > I do a lot of other civic things that I hope are more important. But > even if > > I don't, for many of us, this is a wrong we can see, and live with in > our > > everyday lives. (Yes, this is a function of living in a nice area where > > larger social problems aren't as visible.) I don't blame anyone for > taking > > it on. It's the folks who don't do squat about ANY social problem that I > > would criticize. > > > > In a perfect world, would I pick a grafitti-obliterated landscape where > > everyone gets a great education and a fully belly? Sure. But trust me, > the > > larger social problems you see -- education, hunger, etc. -- also have > > massively more energy directed at them. The city's response to graffiti > has > > been puny -- most of the energy you feel attacking it is precisely > because > > nothing (other than empty words, for the most part) has been done. > > > > Anyway, it's a quandry I continue to think about, as I straighten the > papers > > on my desk into neat little piles. > > > > Best, > > David Brauer > > King Field - Ward 10 > >
Re: Paper Box Responsibility
The next time I want to buy some music I will remember to spend my time (and money) more wisely. "McDonald, Lisa M" wrote: > > You think that is bad, today I was out visiting busineses on Hennepin Avenue > and discovered that everyone oif our new pedestrian light standards, which > we haven't even turned on yet, had been stickered by a record company. Of > course I pulled off a sticker and went to Oarfolk on 26th and Lyndale to > see if I could find an address for this company so we can issue a ticket. > The owner of the shop asked me why I didn't have better things to do with my > time and I said well how would you feel as a business owner if you had just > paid for these light fixtures or if you had to pay extra taxes to clean it > up. He thought I should get a life. I'ts really hard to want to improve the > neighborhood when folks think vandalism is okay. -- Rich McMartin mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tcfreenet.org/people/mcmartin/ Bryant Neighborhood of Minneapolis
Re: Paper Box Responsibility
>Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 14:24:28 -0500 >From: "D.Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Paper Box Responsibility >. . . >I too think this >obsession with graffiti is pointless. In fact - I've even seen some >graffiti I've rather liked. >. . . >D. Klein >Kenwood I'd bet that this graffiti that you "rather liked" wasn't on your property!
Re: Paper Box Responsibility
>Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 14:24:28 -0500 >From: "D.Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Paper Box Responsibility >. . . >I too think this >obsession with graffiti is pointless. In fact - I've even seen some >graffiti I've rather liked. >. . . >D. Klein >Kenwood I'd bet that this graffiti that you "rather liked" wasn't on your property! Tim Bonham Standish-Ericson
