Workers threaten Hyatt boycott, while Hilton reports debt problems

“Come on Hyatt. Met husband there, want to like.”
– Kelly K. Trumpbour, via Twitter‏

“There was a reason that private investment could not be found for the [Hilton] hotel – the financials were probably not worth the investment. The difference was and is that the city council isn’t risking their own money they put the taxpayers money on the line. It is much easier to risk someones else money to reach a desired social agenda.”
– KnowNothingParty

“Quick, fetch a consultant! #eyeroll”
– Dennis, via Twitter

“No problem at the Hyatt that a responsible employer who respects its workers won’t fix.”
– Lisa O’Reilly, via Facebook

“Since the city backed the building of this ugly monstrosity that blocks the view of downtown from Camden Yards (remember when you could see the Bromo Seltzer tower from right field) in an area already over-saturated with every major brand of corporate hotel chain (Marriott, Hilton, Sheraton, Days Inn, Hampton, Inn Holiday Inn, Courtyard Marriott, etc), we the taxpayer are on the hook.”
– Matthew Riesner

“The hotel mess is even bigger than that, Matthew. There actually was a hotel boom a few years ago, but the city actively squashed any potential continuation of that when they built the Hilton. Private developers wanted to build kinds of hotels targeted for different markets than the conventioneers (upscale, downscale, boutique etc.), but like the china shop bull, the city’s failed foray pre-empted any further growth. Now to compound its losing stake, the city leaders want to build a new mega-convention/hotel/arena which would replace the existing Hackerman Sheraton. The city should simply not pick winners, period.”
– Gerald Neily

“These developers are the good guys, it’s the greedy operators that are jiggling the books so that the union workers are getting the short end of the stick.”
– Walter
_______________________________________
City reserves right to clear homeless camps before residents are resettled

“Under O’Malley, the city banned feeding the homeless in front of city hall and pushed it under 83, now they’re moving those folks and pretty much eliminating the little bit of security they managed to provide for themselves. I can’t help but view the recent actions of the city against the homeless as shameful.”
– Zachary Murray

“I never know what the hell Stephanie is thinking.”
– badrighthand, via Twitter

“Really? Singer doesn’t think these encampments present any health issues? Some quick Googling offers what would seem to be an obvious assessment: http://www.popcenter.org/problems/homeless_encampments/. Garbage attracts rodents and other vermin. Food cannot be stored, and dishes cannot be washed properly, facilitating the spread of food-borne diseases. Depending on a camp’s location, some residents might use portable toilets or public facilities, but most are likely to use an outdoor location. Poor hygiene contributes to dental and skin problems.”
– James Hunt

“To me, its proof of of the heartlessness of SRB’s administration. I’ll bet someone thought it degraded the farmer’s market scene or their drive to work. It’s damn uncomfortable to see human beings living in shanty towns, but removing an encampment. . . As far as I know, it is not possible to house all of the homeless in temporary shelters because we don’t have nearly the beds of temporary shelter needed. Emergency beds are not allocated by the week or by the month – its for one night only, no storage, no cooking facilities, no other services or care given. The next night, you get in line again. People with the same sorts of medical conditions and addiction issues share the temporary shelter beds – but in closer quarters. So, that tuberculosis their worried about? Yeah – it’ll spread faster in a dorm shelter.”
– bmorepanic

“If there’s a lack of affordable housing, why have people abandoned 20,000+ City properties because they are worthless? Does affordable housing really mean free housing? Who would pay the the $30-40 million or so per year to provide free housing to all of the homeless?. . . The ‘inadequate supply of affordable housing’ mantra repeated ad nauseum by some homeless advocates is meaningless and a disservice to the homeless unless they define in concrete, monetary terms, what it is they actually mean by the phrase. What the homeless really need is a large scale investment in social services and a structured living environment. . .”
– asteroid_B612
________________________________________
City workers trash the remains of Camp 83

“Word came down from above that the camp was a health and safety risk, so God told you to clear the camp?”
– John Stechschulte

“So in Baltimore you can be homeless, set up a camp on public land, be given housing, and then leave your mess for a city worker to remove. Wait until the word gets out we will have every homeless person in the mid-atlantic coming here.”
– Matthew Riesner

“Can’t help but wonder where those people would be if all those wonderful advocates didn’t have their back.”
– Mair
______________________________________________
The way to end the tragedy of homelessness: permanent housing

“You would think that more people, including those in the nonprofit world would be all over the idea of permanent housing for homeless people, instead of shelters and other options that simply don’t work to address the issues that led to homelessness in the first place. When people have a stable residence, so many of the underlying issues that led to homelessness can be better monitored and corrected, including health and mental wellness. Unfortunately people prefer the band-aid approach – wait for someone to become homeless and then warehouse them.”
– Carol Ott

“Considering the past history of our government officials regarding homelessness and insensitivity, I am not optimistic.”
– Kay Adler, via Facebook.

“We house politicians and others who are on drugs every day. NOT ALL HOMELESS PEOPLE ARE DRUG ADDICTS AND THEY CERTAINLY AREN’T LOSERS. We give billions away to corporations who do nothing for people.”
– Bonnie Lane

“The way to end the tragedy of homelessness: permanent housing” and a new Director of the Mayor’s Office of Human Services to replace Ms. Olivia D. Farrow.”
– trueheart4life

“‘A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.’ – George S. Patton. Seems like the city had Patton in mind when it acted last week.”
– James Hunt

“Sorry, James, sometimes you’re just too clever for me. Are you comparing this to war planning? . . . This has all the earmarks of the kind of planning that we do to pick up the pieces after unilateral decisions are made.”
– Gerald Neily

“The point is, all plans are flawed. None can foresee every contingency, every event. The End Homelessness plan is flawed in its very premise: ending homelessness would require ending the very human flaws and frailties that lead to homelessness.”
– James Hunt

“Whatever happened to the ‘transitional housing’ of yesteryear – the boardinghouses, the flophouses, the residential hotels and SROs, the group homes, and so on? These options aren’t always so appealing, but they’re definitely a step up from bridges and shelters! Of course the over-concentration of these options can be problematic (as with any other use), so they should be dispersed, but what most American cities did from the 60s-90s was to outlaw and outzone them entirely. And, not surprisingly, we saw homeless populations balloon as a result.”
– Marc Szarkowski

“Sometimes the answer is right in front of us. isn’t Baltimore the city with thousands of vacant houses? doesn’t it seem logical to re-purpose the ones in the best structural shape into homes? oh, i know, there are so many reasons this would not be a slam-dunk. i also know there are many ‘can-do’ Americans who suddenly become ‘can’t-do’ when they think some homeless family is being ‘enabled’. . .  this note is not addressed to them; it’s addressed to anyone with a heart. excepting the folks with severe mental illness(es), who should be cared for in suitable facilities with trained staff, the rest of the homeless are truly stuck. and miserable. and maybe the answer is right there in front of us. so, Ms. Mayor, while you certainly have the power, do you have the political will to change the way we treat the least among us? or do you not? simple question, really.”
– davethesuave

“Yes let us just give housing away for free to drug addicts and insane people. Wait a few months and the lawyers will swoop in like vultures and the city (the tax payers) will be sued for millions because of elevated lead levels in a kid that lived in one of these city owned houses for a week. 50 mufti-million dollar lawsuits later I am sure we will all agree that free housing to losers was a great idea!”
– Klattu

“You can be a naysayer, but organizations such as Habitat for Humanity manage to rehab properties. Not all these vacant properties can be rehabbed for the homeless, but isn’t there some way to do good for the neighborhoods and the homeless at the same time? How many of these vacant houses are left to rot in historic districts, benefiting no one, when a developer could rehab them and reap the benefits of historic tax credits from the city and the federal government?”
– Arabella Woodhope

“Habitat for Humanity requires credit checks, the ability to pay a mortgage covering the costs of the renovation (they have no interest loans, which makes it affordable), and 200-300 hours of sweat equity. Their model would not work for the hard-core homeless, many of whom suffer from mental illness and substance abuse issues. What is really needed is community assisted living group homes that incorporate treatment and housing – something in between a shelter and a private apartment. Currently, the powers that be have determined that the most effective way to deal with the mentally ill and substance abusers is to incarcerate them or let them live on the street. Merely providing them housing without an array of social services is a recipe for failure.”
– asteroid_b612

“We’re a non-profit with a project to provide such housing, but the implacable indifference among those who could help has been withering. Permanent housing is the obvious answer, but try finding people who’d care.”
– Appleseed Humanity
__________________________________________________________
Scores for 30 students who took SAT at City College invalidated

“Whoa…making those students re-take an extremely grueling test is cruel and unusual.”
– Rocky Ground

“Bathroom breaks not given. Hence bladders should have, would have, could have overflowed. Spilled on the ground. Didn’t happen. No one complained. Least of all the test takers. But we have to throw out the tests anyway, because a protocol that not one of the test takers complained about, was not administered properly. What’s been written down is unshakable. What a land of idiots! This place is Kafka’s dream! . . . I say sue the ETS. It has no business not training its proctors properly. This was a poorly trained proctor by their standards.”
– ushanellore

“Same thing happened to my son for his last SAT’s in November at school on Chase St.”
– Russ Smith, via Twitter

“I wonder if the DoJ gave ETS a waiver for having a monopoly over college entrance exams?”
– Bmorefree

“It’s kind of hard for me to feel too sorry for a Park School student taking her SAT for a second time. And if I were her parent I’d lament the lousy return on my educational investment rather than blame the system for mis-administering a test my daughter shouldn’t have needed to take.”
– ddbs00

“Why does the fact that I attend Park make this any less valid? If it’s because Park costs a lot of money, you can back off because I pay 1/5 of the actual tuition. Also, many students take the SATs multiple times; it’s rare for a student to take it only once. I don’t think that wanting to give myself a better shot at some sort of success in life, even if it was a ‘last-ditch attempt’ invalidates my concern and anger. I’m going to struggle to pay tuition no matter where I go, and higher scores could have assuaged that. Please don’t assume that I’m a spoiled brat looking to stir up some trouble if you don’t even know me.”
– Olivia Chalkley

“Thank you for saying that, Olivia, and unlike ddbs00, you said it as a real person instead of hiding behind a dumb divisive bs 00 pseudonym.”
– Gerald Neily
_______________________________________
City “carves out” disputed land to jumpstart grocery store

“Good on the City of Baltimore. It is a very neat and creative way of managing the situation. . . Rite Aid, I believe, was not thinking clearly when it countered the city’s offer with $600,000. Yes, they have been hurting lately, stock prices have fallen, but to try and make up for their stock performance on the backs of a community trying to turn itself around? It’s not going to win any good neighbor awards and in the end it will hurt their reputation much more than the infusion of $600,000.”
– Jon Schladen

“The need to ensure that citizens have access to a supermarket convienent to their neighborhood supercedes Rite Aid’s need to hold on to restrictive covenant.”
– laurends

“I hope Rite Aid finds a way to punish the city for attempting to circumvent the covenant. Rite Aid’s covenant was entered into as an ‘arms length’ and ‘good faith’ transaction. As such, they are entitled to be compensated for what seeming is a good piece of property. $15,000.00 is a laughable sum for a property that’s in demand by city residents. Perhaps had Baltimore made a less insulting offer, everyone could achieve a favorable outcome.”
– AuthorShereeseM
_______________________________________

Inside City Hall: How “unhealthy” are city workers? Plus, where’s the mayor?

“Since most of the city’s workers have long commutes from the surrounding counties (and even as far north as PA) all that sedentary time in traffic must be affecting their opportunities to get out and get some exercise. I would suggest they move back into the city and walk/take transit to work.”
– BmoreFree

“Who’s turn is it to watch the mayor next week?”
-discer

“‘The City Charter does not provide a set procedure for mayoral absences.” On the contrary, Article IV section 2 of the charter explicitly states: ‘In case of, and during, sickness, temporary disqualification or necessary absence of the Mayor, the President of the City Council shall be ex officio Mayor of the City.’”
– Jagil

“Good point, which I raised with city officials. They said Article IV, section 2 involves absences, sickness beyond a few days by the mayor. But regardless of what the charter says, it’s been City Hall practice to let the mayor decide if and when to designate the President of the City Council as ex officio Mayor. SRB has not made that designation during her out-of-state business trips (as well as during her vacations, sometimes out of state), and City Council President Jack Young has not objected, according to his spokesman.”
– BaltimoreBrew

“That’s very interesting. Thank you for the clarification.”
– Jagil