The West Side Community Organization wrote a letter to Council Member Helen Rosenthal this past Friday, September 18, to request a meeting to discuss the future of The Lucerne Hotel and its temporary homeless residents.
COURT RULES TO SHUT DOWN LUCERNE HOTEL HOMELESS SHELTER
Represented by attorney Randy Mastro, the West Side Community Organization threatened to file a late August lawsuit against the City if it did not prepare a relocation timeline within 48 hours of its request. In support of the homeless residents staying at Upper West Side hotels, the Legal Aid Society threatened an opposing lawsuit at the same time.
Advertisement
Around the beginning of the second week of September, it was announced that all temporary Lucerne Hotel residents would be relocated by the end of the month.
This decision led to a protest outside The Lucerne Hotel and at Gracie Mansion, as well as the threat of another lawsuit by the Legal Aid Society, which argued in defense of the residents who’d be displaced in order to make room for the Lucerne Hotel’s would-be former guests.
As of mid-September, a temporary pause was put on these relocation efforts.
Here’s the letter the West Side Community Organization wrote to Helen Rosenthal in its request to meet with her:
Dear Council Member Rosenthal,
Today is the eve of the Jewish New Year. A time for renewal. A time to make amends. To heal. In the spirit of the season, we thought we’d reach out with an eye towards all of us working together to our shared goal: an Upper West Side that is welcoming and safe for all, a neighborhood that we all love deeply and that reflects the best in all of us.
We write to you today as the leaders of the West Side Community Organization, or WestCo, which we’re sure you know was formed organically in the wake of the city’s flawed decision to move more than 700 men into three hotels in our neighborhood, hotels that simply cannot provide the services that many of these struggling individuals need. The members of WestCo, and the Facebook page from which it sprung [Upper West Siders For Safer Streets] — and which now has more than 15,000 members — are your constituents. Many of us have cast our votes for you; one of our original board members hosted a fundraiser for you when you were just starting out. But today we simply do not believe you have our best interests at heart. That is why we are writing to you to set up a meeting where we can talk this through and clear the air – and look for solutions.
This summer, when the men were moved into the hotels without notice, the surge in crime was apparent, a fact that after initially downplaying, you acknowledged repeatedly, as recently as this week. [283 homeless residents were moved into The Lucerne Hotel on July 27]. We shared your disappointment that the move was done without notice, and we were assured when you said you’d ask for a moratorium on additional shelters in the neighborhood and that you’d work with the city on our behalf. But then, days later, you disavowed the moratorium, and stated you’d like more shelters to move to the neighborhood. And then you went on television and called us racists. You have aligned yourself with groups that do not stand for the Upper West Side, who do not live here.
Mayor de Blasio came to see the situation himself and said it was “unacceptable,” underscoring what we have been saying all along. Crime has not abated. Check the 911 and 311 calls. These men were not moved to the Lucerne from congregate shelters for COVID-related reasons. They were moved from the Washington Jefferson hotel in Hell’s Kitchen which they left after that community’s leader, City Council Speaker Corey Johnson, acknowledged the outcry about a crime surge and moved them out. Proper services for this population of mentally ill, chemically addicted individuals are not available on site. We know this from the head of Project Renewal, the third-party provider at the Lucerne, who said so himself. There is no methadone on site. There is no recreation space on site. There is no detox available. Men are traveling as far as Brooklyn for their 12-step programs. The hotels are missing many of the crucial services that are standard and necessary in shelters.
These men deserve to be housed, but not to the detriment of the neighborhood housing them. In fact, WestCo and its supporters have asked that these men be moved to state-accredited facilities that will give them the care they need. The Mayor has promised to do so, reiterating what he and other homeless advocates have long said: Hotels are not the answer.
You had every right to think that the Upper West Side would welcome people in need with open arms. This is a compassionate, diverse community, a liberal bastion of people who have for decades welcomed the unhoused. Before this chain of events, the Upper West Side already had 7 shelters. Now we have 11 shelters and rank 9th of 59 in neighborhoods housing the homeless. That history speaks volumes.
That’s who we are, have always been, and will always be. But to help these men, they need far more than what has been provided. We hope you respect our candor and honesty laying out our concerns. We hope you’ll agree that the time for name-calling and politicking has passed, and the time for us all to move forward together to find a solution that will help our neighborhood and others, as well as these vulnerable men, is now. We look forward to meeting with you at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
WEST SIDE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION”
Great letter. But HR is such a corrupt opportunist that she will only respond/react if her hand is forced or a new suitor comes with better incentives. Thank you, WSCO & Mr Mastro for your help in this matter which is distressing for all concerned.
Though it might be nice of this group to write this letter to Helen Rosenthal, it would be more appropriate to ask her to resign and to donate her salary to the homeless people she pretends to care about.
Helen Rosenthal is a disingenuous person and representative for the UWS. She uses her salary and time for her own personal interest and agenda. She has done nothing to help the UWS before the pandemic when the neighborhood was already in decline with lots of small businesses shattered, homelessness. She was absent during the pandemic only to resurface completely unprepared to deal with the 4 hotels that turned shelters without any notification and flip flopping on what needed to be done. She is not an advocate for the homeless, she is playing the Lucerne situation to try to say so while she cares nothing about all the other homeless, unemployed, and down on their luck people of the UWS. She is incompetent and phony. There are so many ways to be a member of the good charitable UWS community to help those who are less fortunate than us.
Helen it is time for you to resign. You will do us all a big favor including the men at the Lucerne.
UWS person:
“ask her to resign and to donate her salary to the homeless people she pretends to care about.”
Maybe WSCG should have donated the $137,000 they raised to the homeless they claim to care so much about.
This group has already shed more light on the situation and raised enough concerns, far more than $137k could ever do. Should this debacle lead to ANY better conditions for these poor folks who the city has seemingly abandoned, this group that everyone seems to demonize, will deserve much of the credit. In the meantime, throwing this $137k into the abyss that the city calls support for the homeless, that has already swallowed $billions, would be the equivalent of setting the money on fire.
Upper Best Side:
It is true that WSCG has shed light on the situation, if only for entirely selfish reasons.
In that regard, Open Hearts and other groups that formed in response may owe them some bit of gratitude, since the work we are doing – ACTUAL work FOR the homeless – was the result of their mean-spiritedness.
And it might interest you and others to know that they may have raised $1137,000 for legal funds to hire Randy Mastro, but “our side” raised over $500,000 in just two weeks to provide ongoing daytime programming for the hotel residents, and a place to have them, which will do FAR more to ameliorate any “conditions” than a lawsuit would.
You do not seem to understand (or care to be clear about) the difference between a person who is hired by the taxpayer money to do a job for the public (HR) versus those who choose to raise money for a personal cause. This group consists of residents of the community who did not like the lack of transparency and the density of the homeless people in a 10 block area and having another council member in Hell’s kitchen who campaigned to get the men at Lucerne moved from a hotel there. That also was not good for the men currently at Lucerne.
Calling them names does not help anyone except for participating in a toxic political environment to encourage incompetent politicians who are frauds and are out there for personal publicity instead of doing public service.
UWS Person:
I actually do know the difference. And I’m not saying that they should not have raised the money they did. But they raised it to engage in mean-spiritedness to force the hotel residents back to the congregate shelter, health concerns be damned (And yes, that WAS their initial focus, though they have walked that back a little). If they truly cared about the hotel residents, that money could have worked wonders for them, and possibly even helped to ameliorate the very conditions that WSCG was complaining about. But that is NOT what they did.
And they cannot claim “compassion” for the homeless out of one side of their mouth, but say out of the other, “But if you don’t move them out of this neighborhood, we will sue!” Sorry, but those two things are mutually exclusive.
As for Corey Johnson, the issue was NOT any “conditions” being caused by the residents of the Jefferson. It was that there were already two temporary shelters on that same block – which Johnson and the community had accepted if not exactly welcomed – but he and the community felt that a THIRD shelter on the same block was simply too much.
And herein lies the biggest problem. No one is bothering to get accurate information, and no one seems to care about ‘doing the research” to GET that information. So they proceed from BAD or inaccurate information. This has been true since Day 1.
For some peculiar reason, you do not seem to care about the homeless in general but just the Lucerne. (?) You say to make the point that homeless people on the streets are the ones the residents are complaining about and are behaving badly but NOT the Lucerne men. Somehow you think the men at Lucerne are more deserving than the street homeless ? FEMA and the tax payers paid a lot of money for these hotels so there was a big financial transaction for certain parties such as the hotels to benefit from. The DHS also gets 3 billion plus in funding. It would be great if we can have more transparency about this.
You also seem to be defending (and not name calling) for some reason Corey Johnson action to kick these men out of the hotel in Hell’s kitchen which seems to be similar to what happened on the UWS when too many hotels were converted to shelters in a very short period of time.
UWS Person:
That would be a funny comment were it not for the fact that I spent 12 years doing outreach to the street homeless on a day to day basis, seven days a week.
You seem to “hear” what you want to hear. I am only discussing the residents of the Lucerne because they are being unfairly targeted for the actions of others, and those others happen to be street homeless. That is simply a fact.
How you get from there to I don’t care about the street homeless is truly bizarre.
Bizarre is a welcome change from the usual name calling such as mean-spirited people and other terms used for those who do not agree with you on whether it is best to have these hotels turned into shelters in the way it was done and certainly beyond a temporary measure which you seem to indicate you are against for some reason.
Very happy that you are a person who helps ALL the homeless people and it would be great if we then rally the community and Helen Rosenthal to help the homeless and those businesses suffering in the community rather than her full time job now of protesting for the Lucerne so the men should not be moved out of the hotel.
UWS Person:
You repeat inaccurate information: the residents of the hotels are not only getting robust social services, but they are getting more and better services than they get at the congregate shelters. It would do you good to actually do some research and find out the facts before you regurgitate inaccurate information.
As for the businesses suffering, that has little or nothing to do with the homeless, whether hotel residents or street homeless. The situation with commercial rents was causing the closing of stores at a rapid pace. Then Covid hit, and the economic nightmare THAT created added greatly to the closing of stores and restaurants. The addition of the homeless has had a near-zero effect on the actual closing of stores.
In this regard, your comment is hopelessly disingenuous.
Ok there we go with name calling tactic. There was nothing said about the men at the Lucerne by my posts here but you seem to have turned the conversation.
So please stop the name calling and attacks (if you can).
It sounds as if West Side Community Organization has hit a brick wall and is as in the dark as everyone else. There’d be no need to do this if they were making progress through existing channels.
They are still using false information and inaccurate data.
First, they do not account for the increase in street homeless due to the subway closing, and the resulting DOUBLING of that population. They STILL blame everything on the hotel residents.
Second, they accept the mayor’s claim of “unacceptable” conditions, when the mayor never actually went into the hotels, and could not possibly have been able to tell from his short walk who was a hotel resident and who was a street homeless person.
Third, with respect to the Jefferson hotel, there were already two temporary shelters on that block. So how in God’s name could the problems all be blamed on the residents of the Jefferson, when there had been complaints long before they came in?
As for giving them “the care they need,” WSCG has not done one shred of research into what the residents ARE getting, which is far more robust social services than they get in the congregate shelters.
WSCG is hopeless. They don’t care about facts, don’t do ANY research to actually inform themselves, and continue to blame the residents of the hotels for things they are not guilty of. WSCG’s stock in trade is demonization, vilification and scapegoating.
Sad.
Ian,
Amen, and thank you for your informed and well-considered replies.
The letter from WSCO is very well-written and focused, and as a native New Yorker who has lived my entire adult life on the UWS, I appreciate it.
However, the Facebook group from which this organization emerged started out with caring and socially responsible people who wanted to help the neighborhood stay safe. It has devolved into a group filled with right-wing rhetoric and vitriol spewing trolls (many of whom do not even live in NYC, let alone the UWS) pushing their Republican agenda in an election year.
Sad.
Cinderella:
Actually, the group started with a flat-out NIMBY backlash against the hotel residents, with the full intention to sue if they were not removed. The leadership started walking that back, but by that time, they could no longer control the “monster” they had created. I know people in that group who said that this is exactly what the leadership told them.
Ian,
Ugh. I didn’t know that. Well, it certainly is a monster.
But as I see it, it is way way way beyond being about the relocation of the homeless to/from these hotels. As I said in my previous post, this group is filled with rabid right-wingers and strategically placed trolls who are constantly vilifying Democrats and trying to take down any candidate, in any position, that is a Democrat.
Their verbal onslaught towards anyone who has the audacity to disagree with them is hateful and nasty and (often) threatening.
Peace out…
Cinderella:
Good points and thank you for your comment. Here is what I think is going on.
The UWS has 220,000 residents; 85% registered Democrats, 15% registered Republicans. So if you do the math, there are ~33,000 “conservatives” on the UWS. (And yes, there are SOME conservative Democrats, as well as SOME “liberal” Republicans.)
Until now, they remained a silent minority. However, they have found a “cause” to rally behind with their NIMBY attitude, and they have become a vocal minority. Thankfully, though, they will always BE a minority. That is why many of them are not only expressing their barely-veiled racism, but also attacking Democrats. Sadly, it is to be expected.
Yet despite my “name-calling” (“the truth hurts”), I have more pity than anger toward them.
Thanks Ian…your comment and information eased my anxiety for today.
I’ve always loved my neighborhood for its inclusivity, its caring, its open-heartedness, its charity, its social awareness, and its Democratic politics.
Ian, what does this post mean? You want everyone who is not ‘your’ kind of democrat to go to hell and have no voice. Wow you are not angry at all and just a nice person who name calls people and attacks anyone who does not look or sound or do like him. A true democrat. NOT! I think you just revealed very clearly your values.
Please stop attacking and name calling people (if you can).
UWS Person:
“Ian, what does this post mean? You want everyone who is not ‘your’ kind of democrat to go to hell and have no voice. Wow you are not angry at all and just a nice person who name calls people and attacks anyone who does not look or sound or do like him.”
When did I say that? Stop putting words in my mouth. As I have noted, all too many people here need remedial reading comprehension courses since they constantly put words in other people’s mouths and “hear what they want to hear” when they read things.
Ian, I suggest you read your post about how you split the UWS democrats and republicans and in between and name calling those who do not agree with the position as something something racists and other things… It appears that “you” need comprehension courses since you turn every post into the same about the Lucerne homeless that does not make sense..
Please stop name calling people (if you can).
UWS Person:
Here is my post, which I will parse the same way I parse those of others:
“The UWS has 220,000 residents; 85% registered Democrats, 15% registered Republicans. So if you do the math, there are ~33,000 “conservatives” on the UWS. (And yes, there are SOME conservative Democrats, as well as SOME “liberal” Republicans.)”
So far, simply demographic facts. Do you have a problem with facts?
“Until now, they remained a silent minority. However, they have found a “cause” to rally behind with their NIMBY attitude, and they have become a vocal minority.”
Also simply facts. NIMBY is a perfectly acceptable word. Its definition is: “a person who objects to the siting of something perceived as unpleasant or potentially dangerous in their own neighborhood, such as a landfill or hazardous waste facility, especially while raising no such objections to similar developments elsewhere.”
In this regard, NIMBY is the correct term to use, even if it seems pejorative.
“Thankfully, though, they will always BE a minority. That is why many of them are not only expressing their barely-veiled racism, but also attacking Democrats. Sadly, it is to be expected.”
The first sentence is simply a statement of fact: i.e., unless the demographics change dramatically (which is highly unlikely) conservatives will ALWAYS remain a minority on the UWS. The final sentence is an opinion – to which I am entitled, just as anyone else is – though an opinion based on observation, including reading some of the thinly veiled racism right here on these threads. I call it as I see it, and I see (hear) racism in some comments. (Now watch: you will claim that I am calling everyone who disagrees with me a racist; yet that it NOT what I just said. And THAT is YOUR reading comprehension issue.)
“Yet despite my “name-calling” (“the truth hurts”), I have more pity than anger toward them.”
Another sttement of fact.
So no, I have no reading comprehension issue, since my comment was not even a response to someone else’s but my own independent comment.
I could give a flying &%^$ about the residents of the Lucerne and where they are shipped to. I care about my investment, protecting my family and living in a neighborhood that is safe & clean.
This back and forth is getting old. They have to go.
Yup! Agreed! People that don’t contribute to society don’t deserve a handout. Period. I am black, NOT privileged, and worked my A** off to buy an apartment in the UWS. I’ll be damned if a crack head gets better housing and services than me.
Privileged:
Anyone who cares more about property values than human lives is a very sad case indeed.
Get off of your soap box. The value of the property that I worked my whole life to afford affects THIS human life. My priority is my family’s well being. I don’t view that as “sad”.
On a recent Saturday afternoon, me and my girlfriend were physically attacked by one of these “new residents” in our neighborhood. I was knocked unconscious.
They have to go. I have had enough of all these bleeding heart liberals. My girlfriend used to be one as well. Not anymore when it comes to this subject. Let’s see how you would feel if this happened to you, your significant other or your child.
MM
Michael – That is awful and I’m so sorry that you and your girlfriend had to endure that attack. I hope you’re okay now.
The week before last I was on Broadway between 78th and 79th and somehow I tripped and went down hard. One of the “new residents” helped me to my feet, and one of his friends came over to ask if I was okay. They were both so concerned as my knee was bleeding. I have tears in my eyes as I relate this story and I will never forget their kindness.
Yes, there are some bad ones there, no doubt. And there are also some really good ones. Please remember that…
I hear you and thank you for your concern. I’m still experiencing some headaches but feel pretty good overall. What I’m saying is that our neighborhood has become substantially more dangerous because of the new inhabitants. Tell me that walking on Broadway in the 70s and 80s during the evening hours is now not a scary proposition?
Most stores have adjusted their hours so that there is pretty much nothing open late on Broadway anymore. With no (or few) businesses open, Broadway is really quite deserted in the evening. So, that’s not really a fair question. I just wouldn’t walk alone on Broadway at night right now, with or without the relocated homeless residents there.
Huh? So we need to choose where we walk now?
With the “new residents”, it’s scary even during the day when the stores are open.
I’m sorry but I would rather not have them in my neighborhood.
MM:
“What I’m saying is that our neighborhood has become substantially more dangerous because of the new inhabitants.”
First, crime on the UWS is down by any measure. Second, not one single resident of any of the hotels has ben accused of much less arrested for any crime against a person: the only arrests were for property crimes (e.g., stealing a Citibike). So what measure are you using for “more dangerous.” As well, how do you know that that danger is created by the “new inhabitants?” Do you have a book of photos of the residents to match faces to? If not, how do you know whether a given person is a resident of the hotel or a street homeless person? The question is rhetorical: you don’t.
“Tell me that walking on Broadway in the 70s and 80s during the evening hours is now not a scary proposition?”
I have never felt it as such. I have not been “scared” of my neighborhood – at any time of day – since the 70s. and I am a rather small man, with no particular defensive skills. What are YOU so “scared” of? Identify it.
Ian or should we call you god?
More than 40 of 283 Lucerne residents have been moved for drugs and assaults
Brian:
“Ian or should we call you god?”
Call me whatever you want except late for dinner.
“More than 40 of 283 Lucerne residents have been moved for drugs and assaults.”
That, too, is a lie. Only 20 or so residents have been removed since they came in on July 27. Most were removed for violating the Good Neighbor Policy or internal rules. Only 8 were removed for drugs. Only a couple were removed for assault, which falls under the first one: violations of internal rules.. And wouldn’t you WANT it to be that way: that the bad apples are removed when they are found?
I don’t know where you are getting your info, but I can tell you it is not reliable. My sources are the NYPD and the service provider at the hotel. And yes, the numbers are formally tracked, so they cannot be fudged.
But keep on spreading bogus information. You see to be really good at it.
MM:
So sorry that you and your girlfriend were attacked. I certainly hope you were seen by a doctor to make sure you do not experience any long term negative effects AND that you filed a police report about the incident!
I’m not sure from your message whether the perp was caught — but, how did you know the attacker was a “new resident”?
Nope, I’m not scared “walking on Broadway in the 70s and 80s during the evening hours.” That’s just me. Maybe it’s because I’ve lived here for so many decades and I feel comfortable in the neighborhood? Or, maybe, being a woman I’ve always had to be aware of my surroundings, wherever I am, and who’s around me….kind of an inner radar? Or maybe I’ve just been lucky?
Stay safe!
Michael:
Tell me, how do you know that the person who attacked you was hotel resident and not a street homeless person?
Ian is a Clown. Making money off Homeless for many years. We all know the people running things make money and the homeless that need things nevwr seem to get them to help move them out from being homeless. Ian should spend more time helping instead of trying to spew more childish hatred on this post. Get a Life Ian!
Bingo! That is the path to follow: who and which organizations are making money off the homeless problem. I’ll start: executive staff and vendors of DHS and Project Renewal, Morgan Stanley, hotel owners, etc. Homeless shelters are an extremely ineffective way of helping homeless people in the long run. Housing vouchers are much more effective way of helping individuals move permanently out of homelessness. Homeless individuals with more severe addiction and mental health issues, especially antisocial manifestations of those illnesses, really need care beyond a shelter. Otherwise, they create massive quality of life issues and sometimes dangerous conditions for the neighborhood.
You are right. We definitely need transparency and accountability for the money flow here. Moving people from one shelter so many times and how the decisions are made without communicating or explaining or making a good sense. Who on the upper west side or in government/organizations is benefiting from this money movement for so many shelters to come here at the same time?
We need DHS, de Blasio and Scott Stringer to explain where they are spending 3 billion on homeless programs and the FEMA emergency and other funds and who is receiving favors. This nonsense will all perhaps then make sense.
Stringer was asking for transparency. Which Deblasio has not complied with. Under his New Powers he could do what he wants
Brian:
“Stringer was asking for transparency. Which Deblasio has not complied with. Under his New Powers he could do what he wants.”
I am totally with you on this, and I can add something incredible here. According to Stringer, he never saw the FEMA money that was supposed to go through the City coffers. Apparently, it may have been paid directly to the Hotel Association of New York (HANY), specifically in order to bypass certain oversight. Because if the money HAD gone through the City coffers, Stringer would have HAD to be involved in the decision-making. Yet he is furious that he was not involved, and was wondering why that was!
So there may be some significant chicanery going on with the money. And yes, the mayor would have to be DEEP in it.
UWS Person:
You are right. We definitely need transparency and accountability for the money flow here. Moving people from one shelter so many times and how the decisions are made without communicating or explaining or making a good sense. Who on the upper west side or in government/organizations is benefiting from this money movement for so many shelters to come here at the same time?”
Perhaps surprisingly, I agree with you. There was very little if any transparency or information provided in the planning and implementation of this program. And there is no question that ore accountability is needed. And yes, it is possible that there is some level of graft and/or corruption going on.
But as for “so many shelters to come here at the same time,” that has been answered from the beginning. The goal of the program was to minimize the spread of the virus by allowing more social distancing in the shelters. The congregate shelter are petri dishes for the virus, so a percentage of the homeless were move to the hotels so that those remaining in the shelters could spread further apart, and those moved into the hotels had private rooms, or double-ups in the larger rooms, but still social distancing. And this is worked! Prior to the move, the infection rate for the homeless was three points higher than for the average population. Now, it is two points LOWER than the average population, which means it has gone down by five points. That equals lives saved. Which was the point of the program.
“We need DHS, de Blasio and Scott Stringer to explain where they are spending 3 billion on homeless programs and the FEMA emergency and other funds and who is receiving favors.”
Again, I agree that any graft or corruption should be rooted out, and that greater transparency is needed.
Jay
Exactly! They provide coffee services at the front desk. Yet they Do NOT provide for Mental and Addiction Services On Site at these hotels. Reverend Ian is so full of himself. He’s wealthy making money off homeless all these years
Brian:
“They provide coffee services at the front desk. Yet they Do NOT provide for Mental and Addiction Services On Site at these hotels. Reverend Ian is so full of himself. He’s wealthy making money off homeless all these years.”
That is a lie! There are on-site mental health and addiction services at all three hotels., as well as referrals to off-site services. You do know that the repetition of a lie does not make it any more true, so stop repeating the same B.S. that you have been spewing here. Why not actually do the research to find out the FACTS?!
And, again, I have not made a single penny off the homeless, and have actually spent hundreds and possibly thousands of dollars of my own money assisting them. And “wealthy?” Boy, do I WISH! I live on a fixed income.
Ian
You’re the one spreading Lies. I live right near the Lucerne. I speak with residents, security and Renewal Personnel. Keep preaching the HATE and LIES clown
Brian:
I, too, live near the Lucerne and speak with guards, residents and the CEO of Project Renewal. So no, I am not spreading lies. I am at the hotel every day, and serve as faith leader for the residents. So please don’t tell me what I know and don’t know.
Ian
You are a clown. 15,000 members strong. Over 70% live here. Liberal Democrats. 15-18% Republicans. The other 10-15% do not live here but have family, friends or lived here once. Stop spreading Lies
Brian:
“15,000 members strong. Over 70% live here.”
Membership on a FB page means NOTHING. WE are tens of thousands strong – ALL of whom live here – as shown by what we are actually DOING, and the number of people who support us. You raised $137,000 in a few weeks. We raised $510,000 in a few DAYS.
Nice try, though.
Ian
Talk about reading comprehension? I didn’t mention money. We are Liberal Democrats you idiot. Not Nazis. Not Racists. Stop spreading LIES
How much did you give Darth Lord Ian?
Brian:
“Ian is a Clown.”
Actually, I am a minister and a homeless activist.
“Making money off Homeless for many years.”
that would be funny were it not so pathetically wrong. In fact, not only have I NEVER made a SINGLE DIME from the homeless, but I have spent hundreds, possibly thousands, of my own dollars helping them via both direct support and indirect support.
“We all know the people running things make money and the homeless that need things never seem to get them to help move them out from being homeless.”
But I don’t “run” ANYTHING. I am a minister who does direct outreach to the street homeless, and all my work on homelessness over 3-0 years has been volunteer.
“Ian should spend more time helping instead of trying to spew more childish hatred on this post. Get a Life Ian!”
As noted, I am a minister who spent 13 years doing daily outreach to the street homeless, and an activist who has spent years volunteering for homeless organizations. And hat IS my life!
So what have YOU done except complain?
Ian
More like a Wolf in Sheep Clothing. Must feel good to pat your own back so much clown
Brian:
“More like a Wolf in Sheep Clothing. Must feel good to pat your own back so much clown.”
Stating what one has done or does do is not necessarily patting oneself on the back. ONLY a cynic and hate-filled person like you would even think that way.
You throw accusation around like you actually KNOW something, and I counter with facts and accurate information which you clearly have no used for, preferring to believe what you want to believe, whether or not it is actually true.
And then you accuse me of patting myself on the back. That would be funny were it not so pathetic.
Ian, you are a minister (?) wow! A minister who name calls people and calls them racist and other things when they are expressing their issues. What kind of ministry is this? The one that teaches to ridicule everyone else who is not your so called the “right” kind of a democrat? and say mean things untrue things? your ministry must have disavowed you.
UWS Person:
“Ian, you are a minister (?) wow! A minister who name calls people and calls them racist and other things when they are expressing their issues.”
You obviously don’t know your Bible very well. Jesus had some pretty choice words for some people of his day.
“What kind of ministry is this? The one that teaches to ridicule everyone else who is not your so called the “right” kind of a democrat? and say mean things untrue things? your ministry must have disavowed you.”
I have not “ridiculed” ANYONE (or don’t you know the definition of “ridicule?”) I have “called out” the haters, the mean-spirited, the non-compassionate, the intolerant, the liars, etc. – JUST as Jesus did in his day. And not only has my ministry not disavowed me; they are just as outraged as me at some of the demonizing and scapegoating that they are seeing here.
Ian so you are now Jesus? this is just getting to be laughable and insane.
UWS Person:
Oops! There goes your reading comprehension issue again! is that what I said? Nope. I never said or suggested it.
But apparently you not only know nothing about the Bible, but even less about ministry. Ministers are EXPECTED to be “like” Jesus to the greatest degree possible: to practice love, peace, compassion, forgiveness, humility, patience, selflessness, service, charity, justice and truth. We don’t all succeed all of the time; neither did Jesus Himself. When the moment called for it, He expressed anger, impatience, etc. But if one is going to self-proclaim as a “Christian,” then they are expected to live a “Christ-like” life. So no, I am NOT Jesus (obviously). Nor did I say or suggest that. (Remedial reading for you!). But there is nothing I have said or done her that does not comport with His ministry – yes, even the anger, impatience and even name-calling. Or would you prefer I call you a “jackal” or a “hypocrite” or a “fool” or a “serpent” instead? (Just some of Jesus’ favorite words to describe certain people.)
Ian, you are are the poster child for hypocrisy! You pretend to be caring but all you do attack people and name call people in apparently just the Lucerne men issue (?). You are a minister (again wow!) who does not talk in a loving or kind ways and you justify that when it is brought to your attention by saying ugly and untrue things. I think you are giving many kind ministers a very bad name. Speaking for justice is not the same as wrongly accusing good people of being heartless, racist or whatever you use.
This is getting really boring. The Lucerne and other hotel shelters were temporary and should not have been handled this way and it needs a more permanent and appropriate shelter or place quickly.
UWS Person:
“Ian, you are are the poster child for hypocrisy! You pretend to be caring but all you do attack people and name call people in apparently just the Lucerne men issue (?).”
I am very caring, as you yourself point out re the residents of the Lucerne. And I don’t “attack people.” I respond to the attacks on the Lucerne residents and myself. As for name-calling, I addressed that yesterday.
“You are a minister (again wow!) who does not talk in a loving or kind ways and you justify that when it is brought to your attention by saying ugly and untrue things.”
If you were loving and kind, you would get love and kindness in return. And although I do have love for you (as I do for all, despite what you may believe), that does not mean I will not call you out – and even use choice words to describe you (just as Jesus did in certain situations) – when the situation demands it. And I have not said anything “untrue”; I have simply said things that you and others either don’t agree with or don’t want to recognize in yourselves.
“I think you are giving many kind ministers a very bad name.”
Not one single minister – or rabbi or priest or imam, etc. – who has met me would agree with you. In fact, quite the opposite.
“Speaking for justice is not the same as wrongly accusing good people of being heartless, racist or whatever you use.”
I agree. But that does not that those who are heartless or racist should not be called out for that. And true justice DOES require that.
“This is getting really boring.”
You are free to stop engaging with me at any time. I am not holding you here.
“The Lucerne and other hotel shelters were temporary and should not have been handled this way and it needs a more permanent and appropriate shelter or place quickly.”
I agree with ALL of that. But once the residents WERE placed here, there were two ways in which to approach that. The way you and your ilk have chosen – the way of raising money to hire a fancy lawyer to sue the City to remove the residents, health concerns be damned – or some form of that (since I’m sure not all of you are members of that hateful group) or to find a way to welcome them and ALSO work on ways to maintain a livable neighborhood. I chose the latter.
And I have asked several of you the same question over the past weeks, and gotten no response (though I know very well why): what are YOU doing to help the homeless or the situation? The answer is NOTHING. You come to boards like this, and gripe and complain, and attack those who are actually DOING something, but NONE of you is actually DOING anything: working with others to brainstorm solutions to both the current situation and homelessness in general, or helping the homeless in any tangible way (except MAYBE throwing one of the street homeless a buck once in a while).
And you wonder why I call you despicable? You ARE. All of you who come here and do nothing but complain and insult others for actually DOING something – and then turn around and claim that THEY are the ones doing the insulting.
All of that would be laughable, were it not so sad, pathetic, unfair and unjust.
Ian, you need a chill pill!
You really need to stop the name calling and attacks on individuals who were not happy with what went down in the neighborhood with these hotels that turned shelters. You yourself said that it was not handled the right way. So it should be undone. This is what my posts were about and seeing that our council member does nothing to help the UWS any longer except for protesting outside the Lucerne or whatever her next personal agenda is. Just another lame duck politician like de Blasio who is trying to get attention.
Somehow you try to go down a path of of name calling and using a lot of adjectives that are not very nice. And that you are saving (!) the world and the rest of us are doing nothing.
Who are you to ridicule (yes ridicule means when someone or something is subject to contempt and dismissive language) people for giving a dollar to the homeless or whatever else we all do to help our community. There are many forms of charity and help and you say anyone who doesn’t agree with you is not helping or charitable. What nonsense!
And how do you know the people who have expressed problems in the neighborhood were not as a result of the additional homeless population and the Lucerne? Do you follow them all day long when they are outside, all 280 or so of them? So please stop attacking people for expressing that they do not like seeing men masturbating, drunk, dealing, defecating, aggressively begging and so on and on. The homeless people need proper help as many of them are mentally unstable and doing these things. Our kids are actually scared of walking across Broadway and today I saw someone dealing.
I will hold back on any comments that you consider yourself to be Jesus-like and that people actually like you as an angry and unkind minister you have become cause you fight “angry mobs” that are coming at you. That is definitely laughable and delusional.
UWS person:
Not “laughable” – except for your ridiculous comments – and your repetitious insults are definitely getting boring.
Brian:
How old are you, 10 years old?
Vee
Come meet me and find out
Hello,
I live on West End Avenue and 90s. We’ve had the same problem. Two buildings, overnight, were filled with homeless, mentally ill people. We had a meeting with Helen Rosenthal and The Mayor, and they both behaved as were angry school children. All we asked us that we share the responsibility and some of this population is moved to ues. Why does the uws have to carry this burden alone. It’s time for HR to resign.
Desparate:
“Why does the uws have to carry this burden alone.”
You need to educate yourself with actual FACTS. the City is currently using 139 hotels, with 63 in Manhattan. Of those 63, only 4 are on the UWS. So how does that equate to “carrying this burden alone?”
Ian, I’ve been following your enlightening posts across several uws blog stories.
As time has gone on it looks like the angry trumpers, right wing trolls and pseudo libs have emerged on this site to engage with you. There is no way to have an informed fact based discussion with them.
John66:
I agree. But despite their aversion to facts and accurate information, I feel duty-bound to provide it, since maybe SOME people will actually find it helpful.
And yes, the “angry mob” tends to follow me around, because they see me as an easy target. It does not bother me, and I actually find it amusing to watch them flail as they justify, rationalize, change the subject, “hear what they want to hear” (some of them really DO need reading comprehension courses), etc.
It is sad, yes. But they only make THEMSELVES look more foolish, and earn the enmity, or at least lack of respect, of those here who do understand and express the compassion and tolerance that the others cannot find. (Boy, am I gonna get it for THAT one! LOL)
Peace.
Ian
The FALSE PROPHECY!
Ian an “angry minister” who all he sees and breathes are “angry mobs”.
UWS Person:
“Ian an “angry minister” who all he sees and breathes are “angry mobs”.
More reading comprehension issues. When did I say or indicate that “all” I see and breathe are “angry mobs?” In fact, I only used that phrase in agreement with the person who actually used it.
But as I said, I call it as I see it. and if there IS an “angry mob,” I will call it out.
Thank you, again, for your continuing efforts to calmly present factual information. Even when it falls on deaf ears.
Yes, obviously the truth does bother some people …. those writing here who do nothing, but complain and insult. It’s bad enough that they are unwilling to do anything constructive to address the situation they gripe about, but then they denigrate anyone else who actually tries to be helpful or who provides information. Since they do not have anything factual and useful to contribute, they resort to bullying, trying to ‘take down’ someone else…. they act like its a game of ‘gotcha’ in the schoolyard.
Vee:
Thanks for this. Spot on.
The fact that so many gripe and complain – yet actually DO NOTHING – and the “bullying” you mention both simply reveal who THEY are.
Sad.
Ian: The answer is, to “Desperate” 4 is too many!
My comment was for Ian!
Vee
Meet me any time smart mouth behind a computer. Bring Lord Ian too
I live here over 25 years. Liberal Democrat. So much for your LIES Ian
Vee
Ian doesn’t know anything
I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR ANY OF THEM EVER AGAIN CLEARLY THEYNDONT
CARE ABOUT THOS NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR SELVES