1/11's ''town meeting''
Well, the 6th and Breckinridge discussion is underway, sparked by a meeting Saturday morning?—actually, an info-mercial masquerading as a meeting, tightly engineered to present ideas that only centered on one position in the debate. For those of you who did not make the OLIC meeting at 10:00 AM on the 11th, here are some of my scattered observations.
A presentation about the virtues of Park Duvall mixed-income housing is more or less preaching to the choir among a group of people who live in Old Louisville because, in part, we love the diversity of our neighbors. Those of us who live here have made commitments to that style of living, whether or not we want the Kroger or some form of housing on the 6th and Breck site: dismissive responses to valid concerns and melodramatic harangues designed to make us feel like guilty elitists are not part of my concept of a ?“town meeting?”. One of the principal misgivings of a handful of people in the room had come from Charles Cash?’s proposal, reported in a December 30 Courier article, which considered the site as potential housing for the ?“spillover?” when the Clarksdale projects are demolished in the near future. The wonderful achievements of Park Duvall have taken place with only a small percentage of the people originally on the site: others have been moved into the Park Hill projects, and my last visit there (early May) leads me to believe that nothing much has changed for a number of the people relocated by the Park Duvall venture.
Now, whom would we get at 6th and Breckinridge? The nice slide show of mixed-income housing painted a far different picture than the Courier article.
What is needed, in short, is a genuine exchange of ideas. Another meeting, inviting all interested parties?—those who were allowed to speak without interruption at Saturday?’s meeting, representatives from Kroger, our Councilman, perhaps even the mayor. All of this would be better presented in a free-form discussion, without egg timers and hand-picked questioners. My suspicion is that Kroger is shaping the facts to suit its interests; my conviction, manifestly confirmed by the meeting on Saturday, is that the ?“anti-Kroger?” element in the community is not above shaping the facts to its parochial interests. Having all parties involved present themselves in an open, flexible venue is the only way for those of us in the neighborhood to sort through the hype.
By Michael Williams