Sunny Side /South Park Super Neighborhood

Email Communicating with Robert Litke II - Director of Planning

This has been proven incorrect by Minnetex - 8/28/02

When the super neighborhood concept was developed, it was contemplated
that each of the 88 designated neighborhoods would establish a council. In
some communities, neighboring areas agreed to work together and establish
one council that would represent multiple areas and interests. That is
clearly reflected by the fact that we have recognized 42 SNs that formed 35
councils, several being joint councils. Early on there was agreement among
SNs 71 (Sunnyside), 72 (South Park) ,76 (South Acres/ Crestmont Park) and 77
(Minnetex) concerning formation of a joint council. However, Minnetex (SN
77) decided to go it alone. Then Sunnyside, South Park and South
Acres/Crestmont Park set up a joint council. Recently, it was decided by
SNs 71 and 76 to set up an independent council. That is perfectly
consistent with the way in which we have been dealing with the communities
around the city. It is a local decision to set up separate or joint
councils. I see nothing to be gained by reviewing this, it is a fact and
should not be construed as reflecting anything but a community decision.

Denial - Robert Litke (see investigating planning dept.)

I have no idea what you are talking about. I contributed nothing to the
decision of the super neighborhood groups to abandon the concept of one
large council as distinct from smaller area councils. The Mayor was briefed
on this neighborhood decision and had no problem with it. I am neither pro
or con that kind of local decision.-----Original Message-----
From: Charles X White [mailto:charitypro@ev1.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 12:11 PM
To: Litke, Robert - PD
Cc: Valenzuela, Rose - MYR; Marvin Delaney
Subject: response



To: Robert Litke, Director Planning
From: Charles X White, Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood
Subject: Lunch Discussion
cc. Mayor Lee P. Brown
Executive Board


Mr. Litke I have sent you several requests and made statements over the past
two years in regards to discussing conditions that would prevent or reduce
the need for a split or a least reduce misinformation that would lead to
confusion and division within our or any super neighborhood. Since you
decided not to respond you have richly contributed and will continue to
contribute in creating an atmosphere of distrust which will spill over to
other super neighborhoods, based on the so-called split with the 72-76-71.

Your lack of response in a timely manner have made you and your department
co-contributors in something that may be defined as unintended circumstances
or bias based on a divide and conquer strategy.

Before things get too far out of hand I am requesting another discussion
with you over lunch this week or next week to try and reach an agreement
that will not produce such a lasting division in these minority communities
based on misinformation. This misinformation was even given to the Mayor if
my information is correct. In your position I expect you to be balanced in
your dispensing of decisions in a more professional, upfront and political
manner rather than emotional and deceptive.

The core of my requests have all related to developing due process and
fairness to reduce unintended circumstances. No I am not trying to be a
smart ass. I have been on record for developing policies and procedures
since day one.

A simple fact is if those two individuals would have won the election there
would be no discussion on a split.

Respectfully,

Charles X White

Double Stardard

Memorandum
December 20, 2002


To: Robert Litke, Director of Planning City of Houston
From: Charles X White, Sunny Side/South Park Super Neighborhood
Subject: Double Standard

Mr. Litke our super neighborhood turned in several SNAP items from super neighborhood 68 who have aligned themselves with us as well as several civic clubs who were not part of the so-called other super neighborhood.

I was informed that (SSSPSN) we needed to send the planning department a copy of the civic clubs in super neighborhood 68 who are involved with our super neighborhood (71,72, &76) and it would be no problem including their SNAP items in this cycle. However, for the record we see this as a double standard.

You are asking us to comply with some kind of guiding principle that you ignore yourself. We will send a copy of the participating civic clubs to the planning department next week as a matter of complying under protest to a double standard.

We want to make sure that all the SNAP items that we turned in are added to the SNAP process this cycle.

Thank you.