October 27, 2013 Dear Editor, I am a property owner, business owner and resident of Ward 1 in Holyoke. John Aubin’s Op Ed (which seems to have started off a racist ranting binge) was a fundamentally divisive piece which labeled current long-time residents as The Poor and the hard won plans for the improvement of low income housing blocks as reasons why middle class people wont buy or move in or why developers wont move forward. The developers need to realize that while they may have an important role to play, removing the current population in order to lure in higher income earners is offensive and objectionable and reveals the “business first” concept of society from which so many ever deepening schisms stem. It is clear from E. Denis Walsh’s Letter to the Editor (10/27/13) that he has a different vision of the city, one which includes and supports the people who already live here while preparing to welcome newcomers of varied income levels. Other cities have managed to be home to wealthy and humble residents alike without scrapping lower income and subsidized residences. In San Francisco and New York renovated multi-million dollar residences stand cheek by jowl with public housing that has also been renovated and is surrounded by Section 8 housing. The people there may despair about crime, but poverty is not the crime about which they cry. One difference is that people with money as well as those without want to live there. The city has something to offer them. Holyoke needs to become attractive to people not for its housing stock but for its intrinsic qualities. I see the Puerto Rican community as enriching our city’s culture now much as the Irish, Polish, French Canadian have historically. I know a number of middle class people that would love to live in Holyoke, but don’t because of the school system’s weaknesses. I know other middle class people who live here who actually say that there are no stores on High Street when parts of High Street are packed with shoppers every day. I know people who are saddened by the ever expanding number of empty lots, by the historic buildings sacrificed on the altar of convenience. I am not a Stanek supporter. Having just attended a forum at which he presented his ideas, I found no depth of understanding of the issues at hand, and no background either educationally or in past civic involvement which would qualify him to be the Mayor of a city like Holyoke. He seemed like a nice enough guy who grew up in Holyoke, but sharing a beer and a good conversation with someone is not the criteria by which I define a leader. I am a Morse supporter. He has taken the reins of the City and continued moving it in a positive direction. His training and his long history of civic engagement have prepared him for leadership despite his age. His administration has been very helpful in assisting us in getting our business started and the weight of the bureaucracy with which he, like previous Mayors have been saddled, is not of his creation nor can it be dissembled in two short years. I understand the frustration that years of stagnation can cause. But it is always too easy to blame the ills of a city on a scapegoat or an incumbent. Any society in which people yell down their opponents, without listening to them or defame them by word or action, has lost its right to identify as a democracy. I am awed by the quickness with which people abandon any veneer of civilization.
Posted on: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 03:36:30 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015