|
510-595-4661
Greens@richmondgreens.net
The Richmond Greens Say:
More gardens and trees and less neighborhood
blight:
Yes to the Friends of Baxter Creek , dedicated to preserving
and restoring Baxter Creek in El Cerrito and Richmond. http://www.creativedifferences.com/baxtercreek
Yes to the Ma'at Youth Academy, a multicultural environmental
organization dedicated to a safer and cleaner, healthier environment.
www.maatyouthacademy.org
510-222-6594
Yes to the Richmond Urban Forest and the initiatives
of its advisory committee, working to increase citizen awareness
of the ecological and aesthetic value of trees, to act as guardians
of the public trees in the community and to advocate a well
tended and increased canopy over the city.
NO to ugly street signs and blight in residential areas.
Here is a concrete example of how these values work:
The Street Sweeping Signs Struggle
We salute the leadership of Jeff Jones, president of the
Richmond Annex Neighborhood Association. Thank you, Jeff, for
defending the beauty of the Richmond neighborhoods, for representing
local needs and promoting decentralization, respect for diversity
and democracy.
In September and October of 2002 the Richmond Greens added
their voices to the many that said NO! to a city plan for a
one-measure-fits-all-city-wide street-sweeping program which,
without consulting with most residents and neighborhood associations,
started planting numerous, ugly and oversized "street sweeping
signs" on each block of the entire city (in a program costing
$1.6 million!) and which carried penalty fines if not obeyed.
On September 10, 2002 the Richmond City Council intended to
move forward with plan which did not take into account that
some neighborhoods of Richmond (like the Annex, the Panhandle
Annex, and others) are overcrowded with vehicles that must be
parked on-street due to limited parking availability and to
the fact that most of the homes are small bungalow style houses
with single car garages that have more than one vehicle. The
streets of these neighborhoods are ordinarily pretty clean and
the tough-hand measures by city hall seemed quite inappropriate.
Each neighborhood has its own unique characteristics and problems.
There is a diversity of conditions and needs.
|
The residents of the Annex and Panhandle Annex considered the
proposed signs on small residential streets a form of blight,
and favored a voluntary street sweeping program similar to that
of El Cerrito and other cities. This satisfies legal mandates,
it is neighbor-friendly, and it works.
The Richmond Greens worked with the Richmond Annex and Panhandle
Annex communities and neighbors to inform residents of the city's
obtuse intentions and actions and to organize a response for
respect to the local community needs, aspirations and will.
Under the "Street Sweeping is good. Streets signs are
Ugly. Streets Fines are Bad" flag the Richmond Greens participated
with the mobilized local residents and spoke at city council
meetings (9/24/02; 10/08/02; 10/22/02) sending a clear and strong
message that we were not going to stand for City Hall blight
in our neighborhoods and that we support neighborhood local
decision making.
After many speakers pounded the city officials they finally
got the message. The City manager came back to the council on
October 22nd with a proposal that responded to the demands of
the residents and allowed for each of the many ( 39/) Richmond
neighborhoods to decide whether they desire the signs and fines
in their residential streets or not. Signs planted in neighborhoods
not desiring them will be removed. High traffic thoroughfares
will have signs. Each neighborhood opting for the voluntary
program must guarantee that the streets get swept.
This is another story of citizens defending the beauty of their
neighborhoods, fighting city hall for democratic rule, for decentralization,
for common sense, for respecting diversity, for accommodating
to local needs and aspirations.
The community discussion about either one identical program
for the entire city or a program with options for different
neighborhoods did bring up some unfortunate underlying thoughts
that neighbors from one area have about the others. Overall
, however, the discourse was very respectful and represented
a healthy exercise in standing with one's aspirations rather
than kneeling with the fear that diversity seems to instill
in certain sectors and individuals.
Most city council members supported the diversity, flexibility
and decentralization that the citizenry demanded. The lonely
vote against the final plan came from Rev. Charles Belcher,
who must have been listening to some "other voice"
because he certainly was not listening to "vox populi".
. . . and people do remember.
Democracy is Good.
Diversity is Good.
"E pluribus Unum" is good.
Multiple, large, ugly street sweeping signs are NOT Good.
They are pollution.
Many Neighborhoods, One Richmond!
|
