Groupt Drops Appeal of Tulsa Housing Project

[DowntownNow]

Published yesterday...

Group drops appeal of Tulsa housing project
Work will begin quickly on the facility for homeless and mentally ill people.

By JARREL WADE World Staff Writer
Published: 12/4/2008  12:00 AM
Last Modified: 12/4/2008  3:00 AM

The organization that fought the construction of residential apartments for chronically homeless and mentally ill people dropped its appeal Wednesday, opening the way for construction at 10 N. Yale Ave., as first reported on tulsaworld.com.

Mike Brose, executive director of the Mental Health Association in Tulsa, said the association looks forward to working closely with area residents and the White City neighborhood, which is at the center of the Who Owns Tulsa campaign and is near the planned facility.

"We're moving forward — not only with the construction of the apartments — but also with working with those neighborhoods, which will be in their interest and our interest," he said.

The Mental Health Association will manage the 76-unit complex, which will be built by the Tulsa Housing Authority.

Twenty-five units will be for the association's Safe Haven program and will be transitional living space for chronically homeless and mentally ill people.

Brose said an agreement was reached with the leaders of Who Owns Tulsa to drop the opposition, although he would not disclose details of the agreement.

Julie Hall, the leader of Who Owns Tulsa, confirmed that the appeals were withdrawn and that there would be no more opposition from her group.

She refused further comment until details of the agreement are made final.

The Mental Health Association is not taking time to rest, Brose said.

His next concern is to provide affordable housing for the rest of the residents of the downtown YMCA residential program, which will close in January 2010.

"We are now looking at a bigger problem," Brose said. "We have a lot of work ahead of us this next year."

Brose said he is determined not to let a single person from the YMCA program go homeless when it closes.

"Are we going to allow 80 or 90 people go homeless?" he asked.

The 10 N. Yale Ave. apartments should be finished by next fall, Brose said.

I can understand this neighborhood feeling they were left out of a process they were clearly entitled to be involved in.  Perhaps it was the loose requirements for notification, perhaps it was something else but seems its over...for now.  I do applaud them for taking a stand and wanting their voices heard just like any other person has a right to do.  I also hope that in dropping their appeal, they were able to secure enough funds in a "settlement" to cover whatever legal expenses remained.

I know this group will be the better for the experience and will work hard to influence change come the next election.  Best of luck.

[inteller]

thats because they were going to be threatened with a SLAPP lawsuit.  Some of them may have been exposed personally to the legal costs.

Sad sad world we live in when people can be sued to shut up.[V]

[rwarn17588]

Sad sad news when people try to hide their bigotry and NIMBY-ism with such dubious claims as "the city didn't notify us!" (Again, folks, it was already zoned for that type of building -- no notification was required.)

I met one of those neighborhood advocates a few weeks ago, and it was ... scary. And disheartening.

With an advocate like that, the neighborhood doesn't need enemies.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Sad sad news when people try to hide their bigotry and NIMBY-ism with such dubious claims as "the city didn't notify us!" (Again, folks, it was already zoned for that type of building -- no notification was required.)

I met one of those neighborhood advocates a few weeks ago, and it was ... scary. And disheartening.

With an advocate like that, the neighborhood doesn't need enemies.

you mean as opposed to groups who DON'T hide their bigotry and NIMBY-ism?

http://www.buildingtulsabuildinglives.org/buildingtulsa/

give me a ****ing break.

[RecycleMichael]

I know the leader of "who owns Tulsa" very well and she did a good job fighting for her neighborhood. I also know some of the people in that neighborhood and it is probably an understatement to say they are scary.

We lived there for a long time and my wife was the president of the neighborhood association before Julie.

It is a fine line with having people follow you and having people chase you in that neighborhood.

I am interested in the details of the agreement. I bet it included some concessions and not just a threat of a lawsuit.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

thats because they were going to be threatened with a SLAPP lawsuit.  Some of them may have been exposed personally to the legal costs.

Sad sad world we live in when people can be sued to shut up.[V]

Oklahoma has a SLAPP statute.  They shouldn't be afraid of frivolous lawsuits.

[inteller]

they would go to HUD and have them file the suit, superceding OK's statute.

[DowntownNow]

Posted today in the Tulsa World...

10 N. Yale Ave.
Apartment opposition dropped

By World's Editorial Writers
Published: 12/5/2008  12:00 AM
Last Modified: 12/5/2008  2:55 AM

Congratulations to the Who Owns Tulsa group, which made the right decision in dropping opposition to a planned apartment building for chronically homeless and mentally ill people at 10 N. Yale Ave.

The group had appealed a building permit on the apartments and had talked of a lawsuit that wouldn't have prevailed, but might have dragged the process beyond the January 2010 closing of the downtown YMCA residential program, which is being closed because of fire code violations.

The group's membership centered on residents of the area near the apartment building. Its leaders complained that the neighborhood was left out of the planning process, but there's little doubt that fears of chronically homeless and mentally ill people were part of the group's anxiety.

Whatever motivated their objections, they have done the right thing.

The building — which posed no legitimate threat to the neighborhood — will go up. The Mental Health Association in Tulsa, which will run the facility, will be able to provide much-needed help to chronically homeless and mentally ill people, and a few years from now everyone involved will wonder what the fuss was about.

Both sides of the dispute — Who Owns Tulsa and the Mental Health Association in Tulsa — should take this moment as an opportunity for a new start. They should challenge themselves to move forward in a united effort to build a strong community that includes the new neighbors and looks for ways to work together.
By World's Editorial Writers

The TW editorial writers should be so proud...after all the name calling, one sided articles and lack of independent journalism on the subject, they offer this lil tidbit as a backhanded gesture of goodwill.  

This is the last I'm going to say on the subject:

I have yet to see Kathy Taylor (Mayor), Ruth Kaiser-Nelson (THA), Chuck Patterson (THA), Annie Mae Barnes (THA), Scott Zarrow (THA), any of the City Councilors , or any leadership member of the Building Tulsa, Building Lives stand up and say "enough with all of this conflict, let us show you how its done to truly be generous in our goal to help the homeless - come, build it in MY BACKYARD." I say true leaders lead by example...as soon as someone says lets build such a project in midtown, say near Maple Ridge, I guarantee all heck would break loose to fight it. But prove me wrong, let the next project go there. Some great lots could be had for the $800,000 paid here.

[MDepr2007]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I know the leader of "who owns Tulsa" very well and she did a good job fighting for her neighborhood. I also know some of the people in that neighborhood and it is probably an understatement to say they are scary.

We lived there for a long time and my wife was the president of the neighborhood association before Julie.

It is a fine line with having people follow you and having people chase you in that neighborhood.

I am interested in the details of the agreement. I bet it included some concessions and not just a threat of a lawsuit.

So the ones who haven't ran away from the neighborhood should be stepped on by a higher holier than though ??

My neighborhood has gone to crap because of section 8 , THA , city code inspectors etc and people who just don't care about the people around them.

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by MDepr2007

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I know the leader of "who owns Tulsa" very well and she did a good job fighting for her neighborhood. I also know some of the people in that neighborhood and it is probably an understatement to say they are scary.

We lived there for a long time and my wife was the president of the neighborhood association before Julie.

It is a fine line with having people follow you and having people chase you in that neighborhood.

I am interested in the details of the agreement. I bet it included some concessions and not just a threat of a lawsuit.

So the ones who haven't ran away from the neighborhood should be stepped on by a higher holier than though ??

It's that the people in the neighborhood weren't using their brains and the better angels of their nature.

I live in Red Fork, and sure, there are a few crazies there. But not the frothing-mouth lunacy and misanthropy I saw.

It should be spelled "holier than thou," by the way.

[inteller]

all you say were people deeply concerned about protecting the values of their neighborhood.  you'll get the same way when bull**** comes rolling into your back yard.

[RecycleMichael]

It is always the challenges that help organize a neighborhood. It ain't the block parties nor the potlucks.

When a developer proposes something that changes why the people invested there in the first place, the folks organize and fight back.

Ain't nothing wrong with that at all.

Julie has done a great job in fighting for so many people. I didn't agree with all the reasons, but they stayed focused, organized and continually working. Even if you disagree with their motives, they were a great example of how a neighborhood association should work.

[MDepr2007]

Kinda like the ones for the downtown ballpark but while they looked down and ridiculed those with a different opinion it was done with a ?
hmmm nevermind I think it was the same