Tag Cloud
Let's get a couple of things straight: The shooting at 18th and J this weekend wasn't caused by Second Saturday. And it isn't going to take Second Saturday down.
The shooting was an act of violence by someone who ended up in Sacramento's central city with a grudge and a gun. Sure, they may have been drawn here by the street party atmosphere that has grown around what began as an art walk. But they might have been here on a Tuesday night as well.
Did they come to drink? Possibly. Did having a drink or two cause them to shoot at each other? That's a leap. Alcohol does not make someone a murderer.
It may, however, cause one to hurl. And the ongoing irritation of some Midtown residents with drunken young adults has led the opportunistic to link what is essentially a nuisance with…murder. This linkage is specious, and it is callous. The chorus of "I told you so’s” from some neighbors of the area has been particularly disturbing.
As a former resident of Midtown, and a current resident of the more-challenged Alkali Flat neighborhood downtown, I sympathize with those who have had to wash vomit off their sidewalks, had their fence posts or potted plants broken, or even had to shovel excrement out of their flower beds. I've done it myself. No fun.
But the aggressive exploitation of this tragedy by a handful people with an agenda has been disturbing. Let's be real: The nuisance of immature, drunken people is not comparable to an innocent young man dying in a crossfire. Those who are linking the two together for their own rhetorical gain should be ashamed of themselves.
If anything, the argument could be made that the shooting this past weekend was simply the exception that proves the rule. People got shot. The first thing I thought of was: Wow, most of the time, thousands and thousands of people come to Second Saturday and no one gets shot. And most of the 15,000-20,000 people who come don't even get drunk.
Sacramento, like most large American cities, has a gang problem. It has crime. And despite the histrionic claims of some Midtowners – one recently referred to the lovely Marshall Park area as “a war zone” – the central city actually has less crime than many outlying areas.
I've lived in the central city off and on since 1981. I have never been robbed, mugged, burgled, assaulted or otherwise accosted. I did have my car broken into once. But one friend who lives in a very nice neighborhood in South Land Park had his car broken into three times – in one year.
The snobbery of some central city residents is revealed in such circumstances: the dismissal of other Sacramentans as “suburbanites” and “douches” is just a more acceptable form of prejudice, and may masked deeper prejudices.
And it feeds a new kind of NIMBYism: Gangland slayings are too bad, but I can ignore them if they’re in South Natomas or North Sacramento; they’re tragic if they’re in my backyard.
A post-shooting blog post on sacbee.com noted the other day that statistics show that there has been no increase in crime on Second Saturdays during the last two summers. So again: the linkage of nuisances with violent crime is rhetorical rather than actual.
More police will probably help, but there were cops all over that one block of J Street Saturday night, and they couldn't stop the shooting. There was a crowd of witnesses, and they haven’t yet found the shooter.
Even if Second Saturday were shut down entirely, we'd still have occasional shootings, even in gentrified Midtown. People shoot each other. It happens. It's a crime, and it's a tragedy, but it's the way things are in gun-happy America. Putting police on every street corner and closing down every restaurant and bar at 10 p.m. isn't going to change that.
Midtown does not have a bad gang problem. What it has is a mixed-use problem. Again, like many cities, it has shops next to bars next to apartments next to houses next to hotels next to restaurants. But this is why we like such cities. This is why we like Midtown, isn't it?
Some neighbors of bars take the brunt of nuisances that are the result of drunken, rowdy behavior. And they are within their rights requesting cooperation from club owners, agitating for better street lighting from the city and working to improve their neighborhoods. Perfectly reasonable.
But you can only control the world around you so much. Things change, cities change and neighborhoods change. Most agree Midtown is changing for the better. Shops, restaurants, theaters and, yes, even bars make Midtown a more interesting, more fun and more valuable place. What it may not make it is quieter. Or cleaner.
For people who prize peace and quiet, there's always the suburbs.
Sacramento is changing from a mostly-suburban area to a real city, and we need to learn how to live real city lives, with sometimes awkward, or even challenging, encounters with people who don't share our values. We need to learn to live in a way that is not a dash between our house and our car and the office and the mall.
The young people who come into the central city to party, no matter what night of the week or month, need to learn how to behave themselves. How we can teach that, as a city, is open to debate. People drink. People misbehave. People are "douches." It's just a fact of life.
But the older, settled folks need to get a grip. Midtown Sacramento isn't what it was 10 or 15 years ago. That’s a good thing. When these bars and restaurants that are so reviled by the party-haters close down for lack of business, we'll see how well people like empty (though yes, quiet) storefronts as their neighbors.
A city is what it is. It's not about you. It’s about all of us.
And so, we will work this out together. The loudest voices will get attention, but the cooler heads will prevail. There is too much at stake, and there are many ideas being bandied about, and will continue to be, both on The Sacramento Press and at Midtown Monthly's website. Some of them are very good.
But none of those fixes would have prevented a random, gang-related shooting. Life is unpredictable. Stuff happens. Sometimes, that stuff is people messing with your azaleas; sometimes, that "stuff" is someone getting shot.
And in the heated debates about this that will surely continue into this fall, I would like to encourage my neighbors to recognize the difference between the two.
"...Life is unpredictable. Stuff happens. Sometimes, that stuff is people messing with your azaleas; sometimes, that "stuff" is someone getting shot..."
Seriously?
Having difficulty finding the words here... David, this is really not your best work.
All of us who live in Midtown know second Saturday from Midnight to 4 am reaches totally uncontrollable levels of noise and crowds and angry drunk crowds. It's much worse on Second Saturday than any other night of the week. People who don't live in Midtown and don't experience the aftermath first hand don't really get how serious it is.
You are right David, Midtown is not what it was 20 years ago, it's much safer in large part because it's more lively. Your criticism of the 'older set' and residents in general is unfair and misplaced. Many of my younger set friends stopped going too and hate the street party it has devolved into. Midtown is subjected to a seige of 20,000 people every month. What other neighborhoods in this region are subjected to 20,000 invading them every month? Many boutique and gallery owners are in the same situation of being under seige by the partiers who don't care about the neighborhood or the art and other stuff for sale. I lived in the club district in SF and I do not want to encase my home in wrought iron like you see all over SF. That is not the city I want.
Sac PD held an alcohol task force meeting in 2007 on the overconcentration issue (defined in state statues) and had a plan to address it. That plan was tharwted by then City Manager Kerridge. MBA held a nightlife issues meeting in late 2008. They both knew this issue was escalating. Little was done to curb it. The homicide is not a result of Art Walk but Art Walk stopped being about art years ago it's now a combination of peaceful walkers and a much rowdier crowd that arrives after 9. The two are linked as much as the Mayor and business community want to deny it. Art walk draws easy prey for predators.
We have killings in Midtown more often than anyone wants to admit - but we do not have random or gang crossfire killings very often. We're not used to this and I never want to 'get used to' this kind of violence. We are shaken as a community and we must get the larger night time issues under control before it happens again - on a Monday or Friday. We need to stop the hype of Midtown as only a bar and not the diverse mixed use neighborhood it is. Walk around on Friday or Tuesday at Midnight - it's not the same as Midnight on Second Saturday. Many cities deal with similar issues and some have figured out how to have bars and clubs and residences and even street festivals with relative calm and crowd control. Clearly we have a few things to learn.
Once again it was not just the "residents" who helped make Midtown great. Stop trying to take all the credit.
I don't see all 20,000 people are crossing the moat to Midtown at the same time nor are drunk, aimless people wandering the streets in search of a drink.
Its not a massive crowd arriving at 9 PM its a change of crowds. Between 9 and 11, the art walk / second Saturday festival crowd leaves and yes a crowd of partiers show up. That crowd is smaller than the previous crowd.
I don't think everyone knows that its the secondary crowd that is a problem. In Fact many people I talk too don't like the large amounts of people period. Its too crowded. Throw in a large group of teenagers and people have a problem with the event before they even get to 9 PM.
Please direct us to examples of the "Marketing of Midtown" as one big bar. I must miss those ads. I see plenty of businesses individually trying to attract nightlife folks but nothing that says yes come the Midtown its one giant bar.
Pleas try and use some paragraphs.
http://exploremidtown.wordpress.com/
Admittedly, this blog has only been around for two months--but so far, there aren't any stories that aren't about bars or cocktail/drinking events.
as to the "secondary crowd," the one that stays late and gets drunk, yes, you are right, that is the crowd that is the bulk of the problem. But that is still Second Saturday--those crowds do not appear on other weekend nights. It is also the crowd that LisaB considers the bulk of the problem. You are agreeing with her.
Residents did start the rebirth that made it safe for businesses to come back. So yeah they do get most of the credit. I know Heller and Friedman think nothing happened until they arrived but they have their facts wrong.
And we agree - it's too crowded and the crowd changes - but they are connected - there is a cause and effect relationship there. Not all 20,000 are obnoxious but it only takes a few and when you up the crowds to overpowering, the probability getting a few really obnoxious angry people who vandalize your property, or wake you up at 3, or much worse, decide to perpetrate violence, is much higher.
zen, where have you been the past few years? not paying attention? read Bill's comment below. that'll help
Pleas try and use spelchek
Was Heller, Friedman, Paragary et al there testifying at city council to rid the neighborhoods of prostitutes, drug dealers and other low life? Did they work to stop the destruction of the historic homes? How many of the Johnny come lately faced down the barrel of a drug dealer's gun as Paul Harriman did being threatened with death if he didn't lay off?
As for promotions, Zen it was you who attacked me left right and center for questioning the promotion of turning a one square block neighborhood park into a monthly rock venue to attract more of the hard partying patrons.
And you do this all anonymously. It leads to questioning your modivation. Are you a bar employee, perhaps PR? A MBA employee? Or perhaps Ray Kerridge himself?
Pleas try and check your posts for grammer and spelling.
Mr. Burgua check the conversation regarding Bloc series. I commented on your status of representing the neighbors and events at parks, not how they promoted the event.
Street parties are in Midtown because the urban design aspects make for a better atmosphere and the popular businesses that create some of these events reside in Midtown. Additionally there are plenty of large events/street closures, with alcohol or not, the happen all over the central city not just in Midtown.
William you posted a blog that just started in August and has not been updated since August 19th. The blog posts that exist on the MBA site promote Midtown Cocktail Week an event with a mission as stated: To host a community-wide celebration of Midtown Sacramento's diverse mixology community; a week of both celebration and education of responsible cocktail culture.
Check the MBA Front page or the Explore Midtown Facebook page which is more active. Or Midtown monthly? I see a number of different ads promoting the many different aspects of Midtown neighborhood’s culture. A rundown the FB page posts: Midtown Bazaar, Weekend in Midtown events, Mex 200 at Zocalo (street party), Sidewalk Sale, Discussion on Midtown Monthly on the SS tragedy, Fall MBA Mixer, A call for artists, Midtown Halloween Trick or Treat. It looks like to me the MBA is trying to promote more than just the night life economy. I even see they are promoting the SOCA tour.
And no I am not Mr. Kerridge. You really think he would have the time to go back and forth with you folks on SacPress?
"Street parties are in Midtown because the urban design aspects make for a better atmosphere and the popular businesses that create some of these events reside in Midtown."
"Additionally there are plenty of large events/street closures, with alcohol or not, the happen all over the central city not just in Midtown."
"To host a community-wide celebration of Midtown Sacramento's diverse mixology community; a week of both celebration and education of responsible cocktail culture."
Only time for: these are disingenuous comments.
Honestly I think this monthly block party is one of the most exciting things that Sacramento has to offer. I think a higher police presence is worth trying, but that's only going to keep the gang violence away from Midtown, not out of the city.
I agree that Sacramento is bound for chaos, unless we are a reasonable people who don't panic at the first sight of weeds in our slow-food garden. I get the sense that the people of Sacramento are a pretty united bunch, and together we can help this city grow up knowing some manners. I wouldn't blame Second Saturday, though I understand those who would. Feels too much like reprimanding my child because a bully pushed him.
The overall vibe of Midtown has become "The Neighborhood Without Rules," like a giant frat-house block party.
2 + 2
= 4
+ the criminals that are attracted to the mix
= 1 man dead
What used to be "Second Saturday" the art event is not Second Saturday anymore. Second Saturday stopped being about art several years ago, the galleries are now a vestigial side attraction. The galleries could just close that night (the ones that haven't already) and most of the crowd probably wouldn't even notice.
The drunken street party we saw this Saturday night (and Sunday morning, if you want to get technical about it) IS Second Saturday now. Due to a shift from art to drinking establishments, Second Saturday is now a promotional tool for central city bars, nightclubs, and restaurants that have become de facto nightclubs. The drinking crowd, whether they're sipping wine at L Wine Lounge or downing a 40 in the shadows behind the Beat, are now the driving force behind Second Saturday. And a drinking crowd, without regulation or moderation and encouraged by deliberate marketing, has predictable consequences, including violence.
There is no separating Saturday night's incident from Second Saturday in its current form. Sure, they might have been here on a Tuesday. But they weren't. They were here on Second Saturday, as were the victims of the crime.
Sacramento has always been a place where you have to a little "in the know" to find the cool stuff to do. Part of the problem is that all these people who don't know any better seem to all conjugate to one block, 20th and K. So rather than being spread out of the entire central city, it's concentrated in one small area. The fact that all these people drive in compounds to problem. Light Rail shutting down early just compounds the problem. Going to Del Paso Blvd. isn't even an option any more without Light Rail.
That said, I as a late twenties male who lives in Midtown and enjoys a drink will not go near 20th and K on a second Saturday. I can tell you from the pictures I've seen that 95 percent of the Second Saturday crowd in that area is also not from Midtown. So that is a problem.
Let's hear some more ideas about what could be done ot rectify the rise in rowdiness - if that's what you have a problem with. I made a recommendation the other day that SSers be pulled more downtown with live music that starts progressivley later. 2oth between J and K always has some good music going until 9 or 10, but if there was more of it at R between 14th and 15th, or somewhere on K st, that would naturally disperse people - not to mention give more businesses an incentive to (re)locate there.
This may not be a viable option, but I'm trying to think of things that will help with resoltuions, not perpetuate community gridlock. Just trying to help.
That being said, I like the idea of shifting things farther downtown--spreading Second Saturday in space as well as time. R between 14th and 15th already has several live music venues--but how about something to pull pedestrians past 15th and L Street, onto the K Street Mall? The pedestrian walkway between the Community Center and Convention Center is a natural place to set up some lights, a band and a row of vendors to provide a safe, lighted path to the heart of downtown.
It is a shame though, that there is a complete avoidance of the fact that a task force on these issues exists and has been working for over a year.
I didn't reply to your comment/question in another article because the difference in background info seemed too steep. (I didn't know what to say ;>) ). You are not the only one whose point of view begins at your own point of arrival in Midtown. And some developers have said that nothing was happening here before they arrived and quote "evolution began" with their presence.
I did notice that you are a SacPress intern, so as a journalist you may want to look into that background, if you can find it. There was a three week series on these issues published in the Bee app. 4 years ago. Their links expire after one year. I inquired about accessing those files but got no reply.
Some of it it is right here on SacPress. There are also some links in another piece I published here on the topic. It is an Open Letter to the City Council and contains a running list of solutions that had been presented at the time of publication. Even as scratch paper, maybe that list could be used and altered to "help with resolutions."
http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/37103/Second_Saturday_Synergy_20
That said, I don't see obvious evidence that Second Saturday is discouraging people from moving to Midtown - home prices don't appear to have tumbled there as much as in outer lying areas. But if you announce that something is so incredibly bad that it had to be moved, I would expect it to have a somewhat negative effect on the new location, wherever that might be. The move itself increases the profile and the awareness of the problem.
I can also see that it's a perceived plus for the people who don't like/want the crowds, to talk up the problem as much as possible, because the more times people hear "violence," "murder," "gunshots," etc., the fewer people will come. Unfortunately, the people who will still come despite hearing these things may be an even worse crowd - so it might be counter-productive.
I don't think Second Saturday needs to be SHIFTED from midtown to downtown--but it definitely should be EXPANDED from midtown to downtown. The line between the two neighborhoods is imaginary and superfluous. If Second Saturday is getting too big for its britches, maybe the answer is bigger britches!
And for the record, I like crowds. That's part of what makes walking around Midtown lots of fun, most weekends--at night, a busy street is generally safer than an empty street. It even makes quite a bit of Second Saturday a fun place to visit.
But I don't like violence, murder or gunshots (well, aside from trips to the range) and want to take steps to prevent those from happening, in my neighborhood or other neighborhoods. The tail end of Second Saturday has spurred a change from the kind of crowd that is safe and comfortable to the kind that is uncomfortable and unsafe.
I disagree with the perception that Midtown isn't for children. I liked Midtown as a kid, the few times I got to visit, and I find it endlessly frustrating that friends who love Midtown but have kids decide they have to move to the suburbs for the sake of the children. Recently I notice a move in the other direction--a large number of parents who love the central city and want to bring their kids along. More concerned parents in the central city means more pressure on school boards for performance, and grassroots efforts like the charter Montessori school project that was briefly in the old Marshall School (at least before the district shut it down over earthquake concerns.) There are kid-friendly activities in the central city and adjacent areas--youth activities at Southside and McKinley Park, the Sutter's Fort park grounds, ArtBeast. Midtown Business Association, despite its frequent bar-centric direction, even helps promote kid-friendly activities like their Midtown trick-or-treat event and last year's very successful ice rink (they won't have a rink this year, but will have a very full holiday program.)
Oh yeah, one other thing that I learned at the last MBA meeting--the Davis "Explorit" Science Center (basically a hands-on science museum for kids) is looking for a location in Midtown. So there will be more and more kid-friendly activities in the central city--and more reason to make Midtown a neighborhood that is interesting, diverse, active, popular--and safe for kids.
The Old Spaghetti Factory shows that there is a HUGE market for a few family-oriented destinations (though one shudders at the thought of the hackles and insults that would be raised by the possibility of a Chuck E. Cheese in Midtown). What other sorts of businesses might draw more families in? What sorts of environments? The lack of kids in the central city is a significant issue, in my mind. The parks are mostly for the homeless, it seems. How do we turn THAT around?
Just wondering.
http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/37288/Community_Brainstorm_Second_Saturday_Solutions
In a lot of ways, I have to fall back on ideas introduced by Jane Jacobs: The idea that children need to have specifically child-centric places and activities designed for them is kind of a fallacy, part of the separate-use zoning mindset that insisted on geographically separate uses for just about everything. Kids want to see what adults are doing, and the city kids of previous generations often interacted on the same streets with adults. If doing that requires making the streets a bit safer, adding more bike lanes and slowing down traffic to take into account the presence of kids, so be it--because the result will be streets that are safer for everyone. And no, kid-safe streets don't have to mean "sanitized" streets where everything has to be G-rated.
Schools are a big fish, but one that is already on the line: the Country Day private school's high school is operating in Newton Booth, and while the Sac City district kicked the Montessori school out of Marshall School, there is ongoing talk about moving the school to unoccupied portions of Washington School. And hopefully they can be convinced to do something creative with the Marshall.
As to the parks, technically they aren't "for" the homeless--they are for everyone. Our Mayor has spent a lot of time and effort on the homeless issue, and if they are successful, hopefully there will be fewer homeless in the parks, and more housed people, which will make the parks (and the former homeless) more comfortable and safe. Park maintenance (and security) is another place where the city has seen drastic cuts, and maybe that is a place where neighborhoods will have to step in, providing not only a measure of maintenance but also attention and security. Still, Sacramento's parks are a lot safer than they used to be, compared to the days when people only entered Southside Park to buy drugs or get mugged.
I would like to clarify a couple of things. First of all, I retract the "old folks" characterization. It was meant in a "you kids get offa my lawn" way, as I think that mentality is rampant among the "pioneers" of Midtown, who claim it as their own and regard anyone who came after they did as interlopers. It's a classic human impulse, but still not exactly my idea of civic-minded. But I did not mean to cast any aspersions on my "neighbors of age."
Besides, I'm no spring chicken myself. (And Bill: Neither are Kevin or Jackson!)
I still object to the apocalyptic language: "invasion," "mob rule," "battle zone," calling people one disagrees with "delusional" and even evoking a "Mastermind" and Orwell's "1984"?!? This language undercuts an argument, and marks the writer as unreasonable - at least to me.
That said, I acknowledged that the growing size of crowds in Midtown on Second Saturday is a problem, and I encourage everyone involved - who is willing to maintain a reasonable tone and avoid constant aspersions and insults aimed at people with whom they disagree - to work on solutions.
My concern in all of this is that we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, AND that we recognize that having to come in contact with people we don't approve of is vastly different from someone being shot. Equating the two is destructive of the dialog we need to solve this problem.
Finally, for those who find the current situation intolerable, there is always the responsible solution that BIll Burgua took: Move to a neighborhood that makes you happy! Life is too short to spend one's life in constant battle with reality, isn't it? If you don't like where you live, if you don't like your neighbors (including businesses), if you find people coming to your neighborhood distasteful, find a neighborhood that suits you.
In the meantime, we at Sacramento Press are continuing to look at different aspects of this, and we will be focussed on solutions. I doubt very much whether those solutions will involve closing restaurants down, canceling Second Saturday or denying citizens the opportunity for street parties. Those are just too valuable to our city; more valuable than any one or even several cranky neighbors, no matter how long they've been around. The solutions will likely involve better police strategies regarding crowd control and public drinking. However it may seem to the terrorized, Sec Sat is NOT "a night without rules." The rules still apply. Let's apply them. More cops, less public drinking.
Ultimately, the goal is a vibrant, workable city, and we're getting there. This is just a bump in the road, and I would be VERY surprised if the events of the last week don't lead to October being a much quieter Second Saturday event. The "market" may well decide this while task forces and neighborhood meetings are still grinding away. Rightly or wrongly, Second Saturday has now been tarred, perhaps permanently, so the haters may well have gotten their wish.
As for Midtown hipsters' judgments of people they don't like, that is as old as hip, and nearly as tired as douchebaggery. I was amazed and, yes, somewhat disgusted (though also amused) by the late-night crowd I saw during August's SecSat - it was pretty trashy. But I voted with my feet - or, bike wheels - and went home. I get to enjoy Midtown the rest of the month. If I don't want to hang around a particular crowd, I leave. It is, after all, their city, too. Whether you or I like them or not.
As for moving this scene downtown, I say: BRING IT! Our quiet streets could use a bit more activity, even if it's noisy sometimes.
But please: Leave my garden alone. My marguerites didn't write the column, I did.
But you are right--there are solutions, there is middle ground, and hopefully enough adults are involved in the process to do it in a respectful (or, at worst, only slightly grumpy) fashion. And I promise not to vandalize your marguerites.
When we moved, that block was all bars and restaurants (ok - there is the beauty salon). That means after 10 o'clock it is all bars. Instead of the occasional car parked over our driveway, it became a regular occurance. Instead of the occasional loud mouthed drunk it became every Friday and Saturday night from 1 am to 3 am.
More than anything, it was the total indifference of the city to truly supporting a mixed use neighborhood and balancing the needs of bars and neighbors. I would think the city and community leaders would like to have residents that buy and fix up a run down repossessed house like we did.
When there was gunfire at Harlows (no death) that's when someone paid attention and put in real security. But as soon as that faded from peoples memory, so did the security.
Now that there has been a death, there are lots of people worried about what to do (because people will stay home if they don't think it's safe and that will hurt business). All of that will also fade until there is another tragedy.
So yes, midtown isn't for everyone. The problem is that the city and MBA are working on making it soley a neighborhood for young people (mostly renters) who want to be at the hot happening place.
What happens when it stops being hot and happening (and that will come). Who will be left then?
Now, may I have my tomatoes back?
But seriously, I DO think that Bill's solution - moving his home to a more copacetic location AND staying involved in the central city - IS responsible. It recognized reality and adjusted to it. We adjust to life, life doesn't adjust to us. Bill and John Paul were among those who had dinner the other evening here at SacPress, and he declared himself very happy not to be living in the "war zone" anymore.
"Now, may I have my tomatoes back?" both humorous comments gave me such a chuckle, I laughed at a time when I needed to laugh. Thank you and thank you for the article.
I sympathize with the plight many downtown residents are experiencing. My heart goes out to them. But my heart can’t rest there. It expands to so many others. Years ago when a friend of mine, Walter in the midtown area, who I loved dearly, was shot and killed their was little to no reaction from many. Perhaps because it was said it was gang related. When he was not in a gang......Often times we get the "gang related" label to get folks wired up to a hate-the-gang-members- don't blame us - blame it on gangs attitude....... We get folks to look at gangs as the problem verses the problem of youth killing youth, lack of resources, employment, opportunites, lack of things to do, overfunded suppression and under-funded resources...... I don't like addressing youth violence solely as looking at it as a gang problem just as I don't like putting race in it. Because quite frankly both become a distraction and quite frankly addressing it in those terms has yet to produce results......I also don't like addressing it in territories since it's gang like mentality.....
When 19yr old Eric was shot and killed in front of downtown Macy's his body was removed and the store opened the doors and it was business as usual. . When three were shot and one died outside downtown Denny's, his body was removed, and business as usual. When 17yr old Victor was shot and killed his body found behind a downtown tree his body was removed and no outcry as usual and the list goes on and on. And it goes beyond downtown and through out the city. The cries echo throughout the city.
But that's not what I wanted to write. I just wanted to say thank you and I enjoyed reading your article. My heart bleeds for the family suffering from this tragedy. My heart bleeds for the families suffering throughout this city. My heart bleeds for the people affected directly, indirectly and even for those who are unaware of just how it affects them. But we (you, members of the Sacramento community writing articles, posting comments) are having a dialog which includes youth violence and whether I agree or not with all that is said or the reason we are now having this discussion; I am just glad to see a constructive bridge of dialog. Again, thank you.
The point is that the decision was not made to be "responsible" and "adjust to life" but as a last resort, after decades of active involvement in their community on these and other issues that affect quality of life in Sacramento.
"Move to a neighborhood that makes you happy! Life is too short to spend one's life in constant battle with reality, isn't it? If you don't like where you live, if you don't like your neighbors (including businesses), if you find people coming to your neighborhood distasteful, find a neighborhood that suits you."
This simplistic and patronizing portrayal overlooks the main factor at work here: most of he actions, that neighboring residents and businesses have every right to challenge -- whether done by city/business leaders or businesses/developers and their customers -- have been ILLEGAL.
How does that fit into your "survival of the pushiest" logic for livability in the central city? If you like it, invite these high-powered forces who get away with murder over to Alkali Flats. Might want to move the marguerites.
Maybe when you have been in the thick of it, you won't object to descriptive language that you now consider "apocalyptic."
Isn't being driven out of the vintage home and neighborhood they devoted their lives to preserving and maintaining, sorta apocalypticky? Driven by monied forces that forced them out by committing illegal management and business practices? Despite all the work they did with local leaders to find solutions for the whole community, before another person died?
Whats disturbing though is the knee-jerk reactions when anything bad happens. Its all over the place, and it sucks. Its ruining the world we live in.
Midtowners are not a hateful group who want it quiet all the time - quite the contrary. Most of us like the lively nature of where we live but the balance has been tipped too far. David - it has changed and very few or none that I've heard from, of the old or new timers,have asked to close restaurants or clubs or galleries. To the contrary, we are simply asking to bring back a balance of the need for the cash cow and the need for a liveable neighborhood.
However, the Second Sunday aftermath of broken windows down commerical corridors and the widespread and non-stop trash, urine, vomit, graffiti (and frequent fights in the street) month after month inflicted on homes and businesses is an assault - what else would you call it? It is something no neighborhood no matter how big or rowdy the city is should be subjected to. I have heard Heller and Friedman more than once both state (paraphrasing) Midtown was nothing before they arrived. That is the nature of the arrogance presented to us all the time.
But I don't think it's fair to denigrate people who have put a LOT of time, energy, money, creativity and love into making this town a better place. No one's perfect, but to characterize business people who put a lot on the line as just milking "cash cows" is not only unfair, it's inaccurate. There is NO guarantee that any business person is going to get much milk out of a business. In fact, a lot of business people are pretty seriously milked themselves (to milk the metaphor) in this current environment.
And again, I think saying things like "widespread and non-stop trash, urine, vomit, graffiti" is simply inaccurate. It's NOT non-stop, and it's not particularly widespread. It's a limited problem in a relatively small area.
Sacramento is a challenging environment for businesspeople at the best of times, and these are NOT the best of times.
As for "unscrupulous," I'm curious what and who EXACTLY you're referring to.
One big problem has been an imbalance of media coverage, which SacPress partially addresses, for which the community of citizen journalists and readers thank Sacramento Press.
"I think saying things like "widespread and non-stop trash, urine, vomit, graffiti" is simply inaccurate. It's NOT non-stop, and it's not particularly widespread. It's a limited problem in a relatively small area."
Oh really. You're going to split semantic hairs because one residence doesn't have a "non-stop" onslaught of trash, urine, vomit and graffii? If you lived there and it was merely an interval of every-Wednesday-thru-Sunday or every-Second-Saturday, would that seem valid?
Given the city and business policies that create these circumstances, what reasonable expectations should residents have for the equation of how much disruption/vandalism/crime residents should expect in order to support SOME business' profits, who abuse the neighborhoods but "put a lot on the line"?
Again, this is where the underreporting of traditional media and the marginalization of neighborhood concerns/reports/representatives is oh so powerful. Which is why the presence of SacPress as a vehicle for citizen journalism offers healthy and valuable alternatives.
"As for "unscrupulous," I'm curious what and who EXACTLY you're referring to."
If you don't know, that's encouraging.
David, I'm one of those "pioneers" and long time friends (who have not moved or died) are too. That is an extremely offensive generalization and truly shows your own prejudices and how little you know about the history and people who spent so much of their life in time and effort (sometimes spending less time with their kids than they should have) to save midtown. That attitude is definitely not rampant, and I don't know where you got that idea except from old movies. One of the reasons we all worked so hard to save and improve midtown was to attract families.
Some of my "pioneer" neighbors raised their children here and now their grandkids come back to visit. In a block and one half radius from me there are 8 "kids" ranging in age from 2 months to teens--there were 11 but 4 are now in college. We ALL find it a joy and feeling of accomplishment that we can walk down the sidewalk and see kids playing on it or the parents and their kids walk by and stop to talk. Talking to them and listening to their chatter can be funnier than any TV show. They are ALL well behaved and respectful and will always be wherever they live because that is how their parents taught them how to behave--unlike the vandals that misbehave when the decide to destroy our new trees, tailgate and party here on our streets and in our yards. One young man, raised here, was murdered when some druggie "friends" (raised in the burbs) tried to shake him down for money and then killed him because they believed he was gay or so that was what the news reported.
Did you ever think that relatively new comers, Bill and John Paul could afford to move but others may not be able to? Nor should they ever be forced to because of those drunken visitors who choose to destroy residents' fences, lawn sprinklers, shrubbery and flower beds.
You are also wrong about believing the "vomit . trash . . .graffiti . . " et al is only rare and in a limited area. You have just accused them of lying. All of that you read about IS repeated and it covers an area from people I know on Q Street to E Street. You just don't see it because homeowners clean it up as soon as possible to keep their blocks livable. In summary, you have only a partial idea of the realities that so many of us face now that were very rare before the over concentration of bars and clubs. Oh yes, and I used to go to bars and clubs--more than I probably should have, so I'm no prude.
To quantify your 'not continual' statement - I personally clean graffiti off my property on average two to three times per month and clear beer bottles etc. off my property once a week -usually Sunday. Fortunately minor but grating over time and I am fortunately pretty far from the epicenter. My friends who live and own businesses closer to the epicenter experience this much more often. I have several friends who get tagged weekly. Businesses near the epicenter have hired cleaning crews to keep up with the tagging and trash. 21st Street gets hit with massive tagging every few months, R street got a massive hit two months ago and twice this year I have observed plate glass windows shattered on several businesses on 21st Street and K Street. If that isn't enough evidence for you then there is no point in stating facts about the real and serious nigh time security issue.
The Second Sunday after the May - August events were pretty bad. Fortunately most of the homes and businesses got the damage repaired quickly so if you weren't looking you probably didn't see it. We are still fortunate to have property owners who care, but our patience and tolerance is wearing thin, how much of this can your reasonably expect people to take? Midtown has it's limits and continual repair of vandalsim is not reasonable even in a lively fun area like the Midtown we love and cherish.
It happens. I don't like it. And I understand that the situation is much worse in Midtown, and gets worse after Second Saturdays. I get it.
My original point was that I found offensive, and STILL find offensive, the equivalence of vandalism with gang murder. And I find that the hyperbole, no doubt fueled by years of frustration, is nevertheless counterproductive. Apocalyptic language cheapens the debate.
And finally, there really is no debate: The issues of Second Saturday obviously need to be addressed. What I was asking for, and continue to want - what I always want on this site - is less name-calling, less catastrophizing and less impugning the motives of those we don't agree with.
And I am NOT taking sides between businesses and residents - we need both to make this city work. And there will always be friction, and I don't see that changing. Which is where my comment about leaving a neighborhood where one is not happy comes from.
I live near the future (I hope) Railyards and arena, and it will most DEFINITELY affect my neighborhood in many ways. It may well make it unlivable for me. And if that happens, yes: I'll move.
You have a right to your opinion and a powerful platform to express it. We appreciate the opportunity to also express here.
However, your trivialization of the realities of the issues and concerns and your attacks on those you judge guilty of "hyperbole," ARE "offensive" and harmful; to those whose crucial issues have been continuously trivialized, "impugned" and marginalized by the powerful forces in charge of creating the toxic -- frequently illegal or unenforced -- bar business climate and its impacts; along with their pals in local media.
That's one reason so many seem unaware that many of us have been working with city and business leaders for years on what is being called for now: "The issues of" (nightlife and) "Second Saturday obviously need to be addressed."
I'm glad I'm not a breeder.