WTF?!?

So much is happening in the world of municipal politics this week it's hard to keep track of it all.

We've got HANO whistle blowers coming forward in advance of new HUD chief Shaun Donovan's visit.

New DHS Chief Janet Napolitano also comes to town for the first time this week as new allegations swirl around the New Orleans FEMA office.

The Office of the Inspector General has released its report on the perpetually wasteful crime camera program and criminal prosecutions seem likely.

Then there is this email clusterf#ck.

WWL has been suing the city for access to public records that the Office of Technology says were deleted, while simultaneously our old friend Sanitation Director Veronica White was somehow granted access to the City Council's email archives, which she promptly turned over (without checking for privileged material potentially related to ongoing lawsuits against the city or FBI investigations) to civil rights attorney Tracie Washington. City Attorney Penya Moses-Fields claims to have been unaware of this until last week, after the emails had been delivered to Washington.

White is on vacation somewhere.

Talk about inside baseball! There are many layers to this onion.

And these last few items, as Oyster says, are probably related.

Helluva week, huh?

Please submit your theories as to how the email kerfuffle went down. What do you think happens next? Do you believe that Moses-Fields didn't know? Is Veronica White going to be held accountable? Or do they circle the wagons once again? What's the most sensitive item hidden in those emails? I know I'd love to take a look for myself.

Transparency, right?

--

I know Tracie Washington is probably going to take some heat for only requesting emails from the white members of City Council. But let's put this in context. Only three Councilors actually answer emails anyway. So the real question is what the hell she possibly hoped to get out of Jackie Clarkson's virgin email account. Jackie has always struck me as a rotary phone kind of gal.

Charity Cha Cha

During Mardi Gras, City Business publisher Mark Singletary took time out from parading to write a factually deficient manifesto in support of the unfunded LSU/VA megahospital even though a new Charity would be a faster, cheaper, and more progressive way to restore a world-class medical facility to the metro area.

The piece is particularly horrendous because his argument is essentially that the new project is a done deal and must go forward because he says it's a done deal and must go forward. He doesn't actively refute any of the major concerns related to cost estimates, conflicts of interest, or community justice. He just says it must be so. See for yourself:

Here’s the deal. The new Louisiana State University teaching/charity/trauma/learning center in downtown New Orleans is going to be at the lower end of Mid-City between Tulane Avenue and Canal Boulevard next to the equally new Veterans Administration hospital.

Period, end of story.

That is unless we don’t get close to $500 million from FEMA.

All LSU needs is $492 million it wants from FEMA, not to complete the project, but to start it. So far FEMA’s offer is somewhere just short of $150 million. The $350 million gap is based on a FEMA assessment of the old Charity building and how much damage was sustained during Hurricane Katrina.

When finished, the entire complex will cost somewhere close to $800 million, plus or minus $100 million. The FEMA money is critical.

LSU thinks the Charity building is completely damaged and FEMA thinks not - at least for now.

If FEMA drops our ball, refuses to pay up and otherwise gets in the way of the state’s best-laid plans, there won’t be a new LSU teaching hospital. Also, end of story.

Or, if old-time Louisiana politics mess things up so much and nothing happens in New Orleans, we end up losing everything - medical center, medical school and thousands of high paying jobs.

There has also been a lot talk about using the old Charity Hospital facility on Tulane Avenue. That talk is a feint. Public hearings have been held, consultants have conspired, the Legislature has convened and decisions have been made to go forward. New hospital wins.

End of story! Done deal! New hospital wins!

Because Stone Cold Mark Singletary Said So!

I love that last paragraph especially. Public hearings have been held? Not one ever at City Council or in front of the City Planning Commission. Consultants have conspired? Um, I think that's precisely what we're saying.

But let's go back and look at the whole. Singletary says the only thing standing in the way of the destruction of Lower Mid City is the $492 million (pocket change I know, "all LSU needs") it will take to "not to complete the project, but to start it."

I don't think he meant to write a pro-Charity column but it would sort of seem like it based on the silliness of his argument. At any rate, he seems to think its a foregone conclusion that FEMA reimburses LSU to the tune of the rest of that $492 million.

That's a pretty bold assumption don't ya think?

But not just because I say so/end of story/done deal/temper tantrum...

Let's actually examine at some like, you know, evidence.

The quotes that follow come from the February 04. 2009 version of the FEMA Project Worksheet Report on Charity Hospital. The emphasis is always mine. (I'll try to get this doc online for you as soon as I can.)

In the middle of December, Governor Bobby Jindal rejected FEMA's offer to reimburse the state $150 million for Katrina-related damages. This was a new high offer from FEMA, put forth in the closing days of the Bush administration, up from $23 million.

Let's take a look at how FEMA came up with that $150 million figure.

Again, the original assessment was roughly $23 million. From there, the feds added tens of millions of dollars because "FEMA also recognizes the likelihood of additional damages that would be discovered through exploratory work, testing, and construction. It is further understood that in the months immediately following the hurricanes Katrina and Rita, certain mechanical and electrical components within the facility would have started to deteriorate to the point of disrepair."

But that wasn't all. An extra $51 million got tacked on by FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security for reasons independent from estimates of actual damage to the building:

This determination was based on (1) the magnitude of the impact of the disaster, (2) recognition that the actual cause of much post-storm damage could not conclusively be determined, and (3) the desire to accelerate the recovery of the healthcare system in New Orleans.

In other words, in response to heavy political pressure, FEMA basically tacked on a gift $51 million outside their evaluation of actual storm damage to Charity in order to help Louisiana expedite the restoration of medical care to New Orleans (which by default means the LSU/VA project).

How likely is it now that another few hundred million dollars will be forthcoming?

Well, if you look at the most recent project worksheet report, it wouldn't seem as though FEMA is particularly enchanted with the state of Louisiana's penchant for intentional neglect. More specifically, FEMA seems to think that a lot of the damage has been inflected upon the building by LSU itself due to its failure to properly secure the hospital for years after Katrina. The following selections have been lifted from FEMA's project worksheet report on Charity from early February:

Through 2008, FEMA conducted additional assessments of Charity Hospital to validate additional damages presented by the applicant. During these assessments, FEMA observed deteriorating conditions at Charity Hospital resulting in the continuation of damages. The observed damages consisted of (1) Preventable damages, such as humidity damage and mold damage, and (2) Damage due to lack of use and deferred maintenance.

Here is the chronology of warnings from FEMA to the state of Louisiana regarding the protection of the Charity facility from further damages.

In an April 16, 2007 letter, Jim Start, Director of the Louisiana Transitional Recovery Office, advised the State of Louisiana that, "it is imperative that the applicants are aware of the requirements related to protecting facilities from further deterioration and the implications of neglecting to do so. Moreover, it should be noted that a significant number of these degrading facilities are state-owned. Examples of these facilities include Charity Hospital and RSD (Recovery School District). Avoidable damages linked to an applicant not taking proper measures to protect its facilities will not be eligible for reimbursement through the FEMA PA Program..."

In a follow-up May 5, 2008 letter, Jim Stark advised the State of Louisiana that "now, over a year since my first letter and nearing three years since the storm event, it is alarming that applicants continue to allow their facilities to deteriorate. A significant number of these degraded facilities are owned by the Facility, Planning, and Control Department. Charity Hospital, the Dibert Building and the L&M Building, all facilities in the LSU MCLNO Network, are examples of such facilities... Avoidable damages linked to an applicant not taking proper measures to protect its facilities will not be eligible for reimbursement through the FEMA PA Program..."

Naturally, LSU has acted with all deliberate speed to secure the property after Jim Stark warned them that they were risking reimbursement eligibility.

July 12, 2007, the architect developed a scope of work to suspend continuing damages related to Hurricane Katrina and minimize the immediate vulnerability of the facility. This scope of work has since been submitted to FEMA and was addressed in Version 2 of this project worksheet, which was obligated November 13, 2008. At the writing of this project worksheet, FEMA has observed that none of this work has been initiated.

So is Barack Obama's FEMA now going to "earmark" another 300 or so million dollars for this LSU/VA "pork" project when Charity could be rebuild faster and cheaper without destroying a residential neighborhood? Is Barack Obama's FEMA suddenly going to reward LSU for their own failure to properly secure the facility over the course of three and a half years?

Bobby Jindal is threatening to turn down tens of millions of dollars in federal aid for Louisiana's recession victims but he's simultaneously asking for hundreds of millions of dollars in gift money from FEMA to fill a funding shortfall in a sprawling hospital project that still won't see its first shovels for several more years?

Janet Napolitano, the new head of the Department of Homeland Security will be down here in New Orleans this week to take a look. Something tells me she won't find the blank check being requested by Bobby Jindal and LSU to be particularly prudent.

Mark Singletary's little 'done deal' if is actually a LARGELY UNLIKELY IF.

This story ain't even close to its conclusion, kiddos. Pay attention to the news this week.

We'd have a done deal on our hands if LSU would come around to support the Hillier compromise proposal backed by a diverse coalition of New Orleanians.

Gotta Give It Up

Congressman Cao is slaying these FEMA assholes.

Gov't Suppressing Coverage of Ike's Devastation?

We know that FEMA is badly bungling the response to Ike in the Houston area but are forces also working to restrict the media from reporting the gravity of the situation?

Here's a huge collection of heartbreaking photos from Crystal Beach. There are lots of aerial shots if you scroll down.

Bush's Brain Without a Conscience

This is a must-read story from Salon.com about Karl Rove's manipulation of Ray Nagin and the media to deflect culpability from the Bush administration for the response to Hurricane Katrina.

That fact was proven precisely by what Vitter had done and said at the press conference. "As soon as Vitter said he had just gotten off the phone with Rove and other Republican officials," Landrieu says, "he started in on the first talking point to come out of the ordeal. I said to myself, 'Oh my God, I can't believe the White House has already given David Vitter talking points to talk about this.' We weren't going to blame anyone. We weren't going to blame the president. I mean, is there a Republican talking point for how to get people water? But that was Karl Rove."

Instead of supplying relief to the city, Rove had devised a scheme whereby he could blame the failure of government to take action on someone besides Bush. "They looked around," Landrieu says, "and they found a Democratic governor and an African American Democratic mayor who had never held office before in his life before he was mayor of New Orleans -- someone they knew they could manipulate. Ray Nagin had never held public office and here he was the mayor of New Orleans and it was going underwater."

In short, Rove was going to blame Blanco for the failure of the response in Louisiana, and to do that he was going to use Nagin. He had already set the plan in motion on Tuesday with Nagin, who, even though he was a Democrat, was so close to the Republican Party that some members of the African American community in New Orleans called him "Ray Reagan." In 2000, Nagin had actually contributed $2,000 to Bush's campaign when he ran for president.

Rove knew of Nagin's ties to the Republican Party, so more than likely Nagin could be convinced to level his criticism at Blanco and to support Bush when he could. Here was Rove's strategy: Praise Haley Barbour, the Republican governor of Mississippi; praise Michael Brown and FEMA; blame Blanco, the Democrat. It was not a stretch for Nagin. He and Blanco so disliked each other that in Blanco's last race Nagin had endorsed her opponent.

Rove and Nagin were communicating through e-mail. "I heard Nagin was bragging about being in touch with The Man," Blanco says. "Nagin took the position that they were the people who could help the most to do what he wanted. People get highly complimented when they have contact with the White House." In this case the trade-off for Nagin was his willingness to cooperate with Rove. "I knew Ray Nagin could be easily manipulated," Landrieu says. "I could feel it. We were all working together in a relatively small building. We were in close proximity. But I could see where Rove was going. Blame Blanco. Blame the levee board. Blame the corruption in New Orleans. 'The reason the city is going underwater is because the city is corrupt,' Rove was saying. 'But don't blame the Republicans or George W. Bush or David Vitter. We are the white guys in shining armor, and we are going to come in and save the city from years of corruption.' That was their story and they sold it very well."

Rove sold the story, as he had in the past, through the media. On Wednesday, while Blanco was trying to get help from the White House, her staff began receiving calls from reporters questioning her handling of the disaster, almost all of them citing as their sources unnamed senior White House officials.

"One story," Blanco aide Mann recalls, "would say the governor was so incompetent she had not even gotten around to declaring a state of emergency when she had actually done so three days before the storm. It was obvious to us who was behind this attack based on inaccurate information that was being shoveled to Washington reporters who were identifying their sources as senior Bush administration officials." Blanco adds, "People at Newsweek told me the White House called them to say I had delayed signing the disaster declaration. The assumption was that their source was the political director -- Karl Rove." Not only was the attack on Blanco in print, it was also on television. "All of a sudden," Blanco says, "a whole lot of talking heads showed up on television repeating the misinformation over and over, making it the truth."

I promise that there's much, much more. Please read the article and send it to your friends. That Karl Rove still avoids testifying in front of Congress is a joke because he should already be in jail. My hatred of this man is unprecedented. I've never felt such disdain for the character of a fellow human being. The utter disregard for human life - this man is pure evil.

What is this "Comfort" of which you speak, FEMA?

No more ice for disaster relief.

It's not like we need it for anything.

MUST LISTEN - A Rare Crossover Event

You must must must listen to this NPR report on housing and hurricane preparedness. Why are so many people living in formaldehyde-contaminated trailers? Why isn't there adequate permanent housing? What would the temporary housing situation be in the event of a Hurricane today?

"this is life and death"

It stars two agencies I talk about a lot, this time in the same episode. It's like when the cops of Homicide: Life on the Streets went and did some investigating with the Law and Order guys.

The only difference is that on those fictional shows the cops were solving murders, while in this real life situation, government agencies are committing them.

h/t: Karen

The City of Last Resort

A vacation destination, a FEMA paradise.

Although FEMA Director David Paulison has said that he didn't want to use trailers again after complaints of health problems linked to high formaldehyde levels in some trailers, the agency says it might not have any choice.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Deputy FEMA Administrator Harvey Johnson said that for a disaster approaching the size of Hurricane Katrina, the agency would probably have to use all options, including trailers.

For months, Senator Landrieu and others in Congress have been grilling FEMA officials at various hearings. A new disaster housing plan was to be submitted by FEMA brass over one year ago. They did not deliver at the original deadline. They have not delivered today.

Instead, FEMA's trailer policy remains maliciously confused.

It is not enough that they denied the existence of widespread formaldehyde contamination.

It is not enough that they sold poison trailers to Katrina victims and then spent the money in violation of agency rules.

It is not enough that after they admitted trailer contamination and reexamined their trailer sale program, they began selling poison trailers again.

-

So formaldehyde contaminated trailers will remain the emergency housing option of last resort.

Last resort.

Funny.

Our Nation in a Nutshell

A nutshell provided by our own government fully loaded with dangerously high levels of formaldehyde.

Today's long story in the Washington Post has been a long time coming. It's rage-inducing.

This is a picture provided with the article:


A photograph of a beautiful child. Now, a victim of the "accident" at the intersection of incompetence and not-giving-a-fuck.

Today, industry and government experts depict the rushed procurement and construction as key failures that may have triggered a public health catastrophe among the more than 300,000 people, many of them children, who lived in FEMA homes.

What kind of country is this?

1. The federal government built a faulty levee system that was undermined during Hurricane Katrina, nearly destroying the city of New Orleans.

So to make it up to us, they build us a new levee system more blatantly suspect than the one that preceded it. They build us leaking levees stuffed with newspaper.

2. The federal governments deficient emergency response procedures were a national embarrassment played out on international television. Thousands of people died and hundreds of thousands lost their homes.

So to make it up to the Gulf Coast, the federal government provided trailers contaminated by dangerously high levels of formaldehyde. When people started getting sick, FEMA refused to test. When Sierra Club tested and sounded the alarms, FEMA refused to test.

3. FEMA admitted formaldehyde was poisoning people in the trailers that they provided.

So to make it up to the citizens of the Gulf Coast, they reduced the sale price of the trailers so that citizens could own their own contaminated trailer. They do not have procedures in place to determine whether trailers being sold are still contaminated.


And some people criticize the Obamas and other Democrats for their American pride.

Those people ought to come down here. I'd like to ask them what they're so proud of exactly.

I see an awful lot to be ashamed of.

I thank the Bush administration from the bottom of my heart for all the help they've provided.

Old Wounds Reopened, Covered in Salt

Then, doused with gasoline and lit on fire.

You know that if it's a post about FEMA, it's probably going to make you angry as hell.

Unfortunately...

Oyster and Judy B. refer to FEMA's new plan to sell trailers to residents at $13,000 a pop with the nothing but the most concrete assurances that the trailers they're planning to sell aren't the ones that have poisonous levels of formaldehyde:

Henderson is shocked the agency would do that after a FEMA test of her unit found elevated levels of formaldehyde gas, which she says has made her kids sick.

"One day I get a letter telling me my trailer is contaminated; the next day they want to sell it to me," Henderson said.

FEMA spokesman James McIntyre said the agency won't sell units that test high for formaldehyde. He could not say what FEMA has determined to be a safe level.

WOW! YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FUCKING KIDDING ME!!!!!!

I don't even know where to start.

Judy B. mentions that FEMA, in a panic, had already sold tons of its trailers to the public but was forced to buy them back in January after they FINALLY admitted what we had known for a year or more: that the trailers were making people sick.

Now FEMA is restarting the sale agenda though they won't say what constitutes a contaminated trailer and at least one family in Mississippi is being repeatedly asked to purchase a unit that has caused illness in the little ones.

Yet there's something else to remember here from only three months ago:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency misspent millions of dollars it received from selling used travel trailers, government investigators have found.

Instead of buying more trailers — as allowed under the law — FEMA used more than $13 million toward fully loaded sport-utility vehicles, travel expenses and purchase card accounts, according to a draft report by the Homeland Security Department's inspector general obtained by The Associated Press.

Did Brownie get his job back somehow too?

No, but R. David Paulson seems to be doing a heckuva job as well.

How is this crap being allowed? This is absolutely sickening.

---

In other news about the Federal government's push to murder the citizens of the Gulf Coast . . .

dsb reports that one of the levees that breached during Katrina but has since been repaired is leaking once again. Is that wall stuffed with newspaper as well? Is that the reason?

It's important to know right now because, well there's bad news here. Sorry.

There is a sales tax holiday for the purchase of evacuation supplies in Louisiana THIS SATURDAY AND SUNDAY.

HERE is a list of useful evacuation items you can purchase without the additional burden of the state sales tax.

Extenuating Circumstances

Today's report detailing our enlightened city leadership's plan to evict FEMA trailer residents is so rife with contradictions I almost don't know where to begin.

Recovery director Ed Blakely is now defending an August 15th final deadline for the removal of FEMA trailers from Orleans Parish. extensions to be granted to allow neighbors to remain after that date will be permitted in instances of "really extenuating circumstances."

-

There are many good reasons to remove the trailers as soon as possible.

They are unsightly. They crowd streets and driveways. Illegal rentals underneath the system are becoming public nuisance problems.

Most importantly, they are slowly killing the people living in them.

So the city would like to remove the trailers. But if only they knew how. If only it were so simple.

Though the formaldehyde risks were known two and a half years ago, FEMA didn't get around to admitting them until February. It was then that FEMA began a hastily-arranged emergency relocation plan for the estimated 25,000 New Orleanians living in toxic trailers. FEMA sought out cheap motels and apartments to house the thousands needing a safer place to live.

Even our own C. Ray Nagin quickly recognized how problematic FEMA's plan was, how potentially damaging it was. He wrote a letter to the President describing the issues. Here's a brief synopsis:

- There is a terrible shortage of affordable housing in New Orleans.
- This means that thousands of New Orleans FEMA trailer evacuees will have to be relocated outside of New Orleans because there are not available cheap motel and apartment units.
- That means that there would a second great displacement of working poor New Orleanians.
- This would hurt the city's economy because there is already a shortage of cheap labor and the service economy on which this city so heavily relies cannot afford to lose workers.
- It total, another major displacement of thousands of New Orleanians would represent a huge economic burden to the city and also it would be immoral and unfair to the evacuees.

Today's article wistfully recalls that letter to the President, "Blakely said Wednesday, that as far as he knows, Bush did not respond to Nagin's letter."

Nagin had called on Bush and FEMA to, instead of displacing thousands of our neighbors, provide free medical care to victims of formaldehyde exposure and rehabilitate affordable housing units to provide shelter for people right here in New Orleans.

A nice gesture by the Mayor, for sure, but not one he or anyone else expected to generate a positive response from the Bush administration. No chance in hell they'd agree to rehabilitate our affordable housing stock and provide free medical care.

So essentially, having rebuffed FEMA's disgraceful offer to displace 25,000 of our neighbors and offering an alternative plan from fantasy land that expected a do-little federal government to wave a magic wand, the city was left pretty much to its own devices.

What generally happens when the municipal government of New Orleans is responsible for something?

Nothing happens.

Thus we waited. And waited. And waited.

We waited for their strategy to provide affordable housing for those living in FEMA trailers but unable to procure Road Home money. We waited for their strategy to provide affordable housing to people scratching and clawing at minimum wage jobs to save enough money to make their own homes habitable again. We waited for the city to provide a viable strategy to get people out of these toxic trailers by summer time, when the heat increases the risks from formaldehyde.

Finally, at the end of March, Stacy Head and Ed Blakley suggested an idea: impose a deadline.

June 1st was floated as a possible date to require people to move out of their trailers. That would be plenty of time for people to either earn an exemption by proving that they were still waiting for Road Home money or to find another affordable housing option, right?

Well, no.

Stacy Head didn't even cite formaldehyde exposure as a main factor for needing to get rid of the FEMA trailers in haste. Instead, she indicated that the trailers had become eyesores, were being rented illegally, and were being inhabited as a "lifestyle choice."

There within lies the big hypocrisy of the whole recovery effort.

Not only is our city's affordable housing crisis so severe that there were not enough local options for FEMA to relocate victims of formaldehyde exposure within reasonable proximity to their jobs, but affordable housing is in such short supply that our neighbors have been reduced to actively seeking to illegally rent poisonous FEMA trailers because decent apartments are so expensive and difficult to obtain.

While city businesses yearn for a stable workforce, city government refuses to listen to calls for a reevaluation of Alphonso Jackson's plans to demolish public housing. While there are many elements to that debate, if the city was searching for emergency shelter for the estimated 20,000 people looking for relocation from FEMA trailers (or the estimated 12,000 homeless) they need look no further than Lafitte, which has just been leveled by city bulldozers.

City officials like to mention the affordable housing crisis when it is convenient for them. When FEMA's toxic trailer evacuation plan might result in a loss of workforce, we have an affordable housing crisis that makes it untenable. When the Census Bureau underestimates our population costing the city millions in federal funds, we have an affordable housing crisis that causes families to double or triple up in single units.

Other times, it is an inconvenience to city officials, something to be brushed aside as an exaggeration, as the misguided posturing of some bleeding heart. (Like when they're demolishing public housing, planning to demolish public housing, or claiming that the economic crisis does not threaten the replacement mixed income communities or other affordable housing developments waiting to be built throughout the city.)

-

So now August 15th is to be a hard deadline for people to find a place to live and get out of their trailers. (Let's just forget the public heath crisis that demanded we rush to move people out before the heat of summer.) Do YOU think we'll have enough affordable housing by then? I'm skeptical. Just how will the city enforce a deadline? Will people be put out on the streets?

Today's article only raises more questions.

FEMA will be responsible for contacting trailer residents and informing them of the upcoming deadlines and working with them to find new homes. And we all have 100 percent confidence in FEMA's ability to do this)

As for the City:

Blakely said the city does not have the resources to do "individual case management," and no city money will be spent to move people out of trailers or provide new housing for them.

No case management. No new housing provided. Little affordable housing being built. Thousands of people needing to be moved out of poisonous FEMA trailers. Only so much room under the overpass at Claiborne and Canal.

-

Perhaps most damning, is the comparison made in today's article detailing how the always compassionate Jefferson Parish dealt with the same problem.

In Jeff, there were 17,000 trailers in 2006 and Parish officials have been involved in expediting the removal of trailers ever since. They set a deadline for March of this year for all units no longer required by homeowners and have sent teams of inspectors to check.

The contrast is stark. Whatever the motivation of Jefferson Parish officials, they instituted a game plan over a year ago and have stuck to it, working slowly and methodically. Now there are only 600 illegal trailers remaining. In Orleans Parish, our officials sat on their hands and sat on their hands some more. Then all of a sudden, they hastily arrange short-term deadlines, provide absolutely no insight into the procedures, stand still on affordable housing issues, and claim that this has been "a well-studied and thoughtful policy discussion." No, it hasn't been. It has been a pathetic indicator of City Hall's larger inability to govern compassionately or even effectively.

You wonder if we're close to reaching a tipping point as a community. This isn't even a one-party city, it's a no-party system. Alan asks if the Democrats can save New Orleans, but I want this city to save itself. We're governed by cannibals.

-

I believe I've covered the FEMA trailer deadline/formaldehyde issues diligently. For background information on this situation, please click on the 'FEMA Trailers' tag below to see a rundown of all I've written on the subject. See also 'affordable housing' and 'public housing.'

FEMA Redevelopment

Looks a lot like the redevelopment of our own city.

There is none.

Our Senator, Mary Landrieu blasted FEMA officials at a hearing yesterday in Washington. Also there to take heat were officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC director of environmental health, Harvey Frumkin apologized for his agency's role in the federal government's criminally slow response to formaldehyde contamination in FEMA trailers distributed throughout the area.

"We did not engage the formaldehyde issue as aggressively and effectively as we should have."

"...didn't adequately address the long-term dangers."

He's essentially saying that if his agency had done a better job telling FEMA that formaldehyde posed a long term health risk, FEMA would have acted earlier to scrap the trailers and relocate residents to safer accommodations. Instead, the CDC downplayed the dangers and FEMA advised trailer residents to ventilate their units.

I question this attempt to spread out the culpability.

FEMA knew of formaldehyde complaints in 2005. They knew of systemic formaldehyde contamination early in 2006. They did not acknowledge the immediate health risks until February of 2008.

Is that because the CDC memos weren't urgent enough? That's crap.

Formaldehyde is a well-known carcinogen. FEMA knew enough to list it as a occupational hazard for its own employees charged with spending some of their work day in and around the trailers.

It is called a contingency strategy.

You see, a federal agency charged with disaster preparedness comes up with plans in case disaster strikes. They're supposed to deal with worst-case scenarios all day long.

For instance:

Scenario A: The public discovers that the agency has been slow and unresponsive in ordering testing for formaldehyde hazards in agency trailers distributed to victims of Hurricane Katrina and other natural disasters all over the country.

We already know that FEMA knew of the potential for this scenario in late 2005. They were made aware of negative formaldehyde reactions by their people on the field. In fact, FEMA at that time unveiled a plan to mitigate individual formaldehyde-related issues while simultaneously working to prevent suspicion of widespread formaldehyde contamination.

Okay, so if you're at FEMA at this point, as you're hearing that there are complaints related to formaldehyde, you might want to come up with a contingency plan. I'm not even talking about doing the right thing.

The right thing would have been to immediately order top to bottom testing of the trailer fleet for formaldehyde contamination while simultaneously confirming potential funding streams for emergency shelters in the event the trailers were found to be too dangerous for habitation. The right thing would have been to immediately halt the distribution of trailers at risk of contamination and to come up with an alternative plan to house those victimized by future natural disasters.

But at this point, unfortunately, nobody expects the right thing from FEMA.

They're villains.

What I'm talking about is the villain's contingency plan to save its own skin. Why didn't they, starting in 2005 when they realized that there may be formaldehyde contamination problems, formulate a plan to deal with the public relations fallout? They executed some of the same old cartoon villain rubric. They denied that there were serious health risks, they refused to order comprehensive testing even after elected officials and environmental agencies began asking pointed questions, and they delayed the testing process several times after it was ordered.

One would think all of this stonewalling would have allowed FEMA to come up with a plan to deal with the inevitable findings. With all the effort FEMA expended to deny and delay the findings of the formaldehyde tests, one would think they'd used the extra time they made for themselves to come up with a disaster housing strategy to ensure that it would never happen again. They could have used all that time they bought using the health of Katrina victims as currency to have a new rubric for the future in place to help deflect criticisms of what they had done in the past.

They didn't though. They didn't even do that.

FEMA is six months late on a Congressionally-mandated deadline to develop a post-disaster housing strategy for future storms.

Here is Sen. Mary Landrieu:

"The failure to complete the disaster housing strategy has left thousands of hard-working, tax-paying Americans at risk."

"This isn't six months after the storm. This is two-and-a-half years after the storm, with a new hurricane season approaching in June."

-

FEMA was still distributing trailers at new disaster sites. The Feb. 5 tornadoes that devastated towns all over the South required a response from FEMA that included housing assistance. FEMA's plan was to send trailers. On February 14th, FEMA announced a delay for formaldehyde testing of those trailers. That same day, FEMA and the CDC announced that residents of trailers on the Gulf Coast would be relocated due to dangerous formaldehyde contamination.

"Given that they sent trailers to Arkansas one day and brought them back the next, I don't think that is something to be proud of," said Landrieu, who called FEMA and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's disaster housing policy "a massive failure of initiative and preparedness."

-

They couldn't even prepare their PR team to mitigate criticism by having a plan in place to address future distribution of trailers that could also be contaminated with formaldehyde. They had to call in the PR team from the CDC for some emergency responses to a furious public.

UPDATE: Much more detail on FEMA's foot-dragging by Your Right Hand Thief.

The Long-Lost Art of Letter Writing: One Lame Duck's Correspondence With Another

It has been reported that Mayor C. Ray Nagin has written an official letter to George W. Bush declaring his reservations about FEMA's emergency relocation plan for the 25,000 Orleans Parish residents affected by dangerously high formaldehyde levels in FEMA trailers.

You can get a copy of that letter here. You can read the T-P article here.

Quickly, I'll recap the FEMAldehyde situation.

Almost two weeks ago, FEMA finally admitted that the trailers they've distributed to victims of Hurricane Katrina have dangerous levels of formaldehyde. The contamination is so extreme, in fact, that they announced impending emergency relocation of tens of thousands of people on the Gulf Coast.

FEMA took a week and announced their plans to begin relocating affected individuals and families to hotels and apartments on a temporary emergency basis. They began formulating plans to carry out this relocation, including public information sessions, which began on Monday.

I'm not saying FEMA created a good or even mediocre plan. I'm just saying they went through the trouble.

Mayor Nagin, for his part, determined just the other day, after FEMA had already begun implementing its emergency strategy, that it was appropriate to say something.

So he wrote a letter to the President.

In it, he rightfully scalds the FEMA relocation strategy. He correctly notes that because New Orleans faces an affordable housing crisis, the citizens in need of emergency shelter due to formaldehyde exposure will become displaced from New Orleans area. It is the first time I can remember hearing or seeing him acknowledge the city's affordable housing shortage or admitting to inflated post storm rental rates.

He states that the situation is "a significant public health crisis."

Nagin refers to a "second great displacement" of New Orleanians that will occur should FEMA's plan not be modified. This is a sad truth. This is the second mass relocation involving tens of thousands of socially and economically disadvantaged people within 3 years. You can come to your own conclusions regarding the human rights implications of that. Suffice it to say, it makes me sick to my stomach.

But Mayor Nagin, in what could also be interpreted as a shrewd way to communicate with our ultra-benevolent President, did not really discuss the human rights of his citizens. Instead, Nagin bemoans the loss of the workforce, which he says would overly stress the economy. He doesn't talk about how the proposed displacement would also cause additional stress to victims who would then be on their own to find a new job in their emergency location or forced somehow commute back to New Orleans from who-knows-where. That's more important to me as a fellow human being than what would happen to the stupid hotels if their dishwasher or their valet is forced to no-show on Friday night.

This is indicative of the callous attitude Mr. Nagin has displayed toward the his most disadvantaged constituents for the entirety of his administration.

Thus, Nagin unveils his own alternative to the FEMA relocation strategy. In addition to a call for free health care for victims of formaldehyde exposure and yet another nudge to speed up the Road Home Program - both worthy requests - Mayor Nagin does briefly lay out a plan to temporarily house the thousands of displaced people right here in New Orleans.

Nagin's solution is to have FEMA pay for the rehabilitation of 3,500 storm-damaged housing units or construction of temporary "panelized units" on vacant lots.

You've got to be kidding me, Mr. Mayor.

Where are the formaldehyde victims going to go in the interim? What are our neighbors to do while you haggle with FEMA about how much to build, for what price, and where? How long are you prepared to make people wait while FEMA renovate damaged homes?

You know what might have been a good idea Mr. Mayor?

Anticipating the easily anticipated.

If I were Mayor of New Orleans, I would have formulated an emergency relocation contingency plan to FEMA about a year and a half ago. That was when it became abundantly clear that the travel trailers that FEMA had purchased and distributed to my hypothetical constituents were contaminated with dangerous levels of a cancerous chemical. Not only would I have pushed FEMA to actually go through with their official tests, something that they postponed for months and months because they knew what they would find, but I also would have had a plan in place for FEMA to help house my citizens in the event that something like this happened.

I would not have demolished the salvageable public housing stock of the city. Instead, I would have suggested that developers interested in mixed-income communities try to focus on the empty lots that HUD and HANO had already abandoned. I would have immediately secured funding to make the standing units livable. By now, I'm sure, enough of those units would be ready and able to help house at least some of our neighbors being displaced by formaldehyde exposure.

Mr. Nagin's passive attitude toward the conjoining crises currently stressing our affordable housing market is a disgrace. His objections to FEMA's relocation strategy are insultingly, yet unsurprisingly, behind schedule. His alternative plan is an incomplete attempt to earn a mulligan for his disastrous role in pushing a poorly vetted and reactionary pro-demolition agenda. That refers to the demolition of public housing AND the absolutely insane demolitions of citizens' private homes against their will.

Did you read all that Mr. Mayor? I just ripped holes through your entire reign of terror on this city. Do you have anything substantive to say at all?

Why don't you get riled up about something useful?

Or you can just come cold cock me in the face. At least then I could look into your eyes to check if there's anything there.

Be well.

Deliberate Speed

FEMA and the CDC is will start a series of public meetings tonight.

FEMA trailer residents concerned with the formaldehyde levels in their homes can attend a series of public meetings beginning today that will address moving or testing their trailers.

Today's meetings in New Orleans include one from noon to 2 p.m. at St. Maria Goretti Catholic Church, 2300 Crowder Blvd., and another from 6 to 8 p.m. at St. Anna's Episcopal Church, 1313 Esplanade Ave.

Wednesday's schedule includes a meeting for St. Bernard Parish residents from noon to 2 p.m. at Nunez Community College, 3700 Fenelon St. Jefferson Parish residents can attend a meeting from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Joseph Yenni Government Building, 1221 Elmwood Park Blvd., 2nd floor Council Chambers.

Because they've done such a good job with the public here over the years...

FEMA Does It Again

The hits keep on coming.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency misspent millions of dollars it received from selling used travel trailers, government investigators have found.

Instead of buying more trailers — as allowed under the law — FEMA used more than $13 million toward fully loaded sport utility vehicles, travel expenses and purchase card accounts, according to a draft report by the Homeland Security Department's inspector general obtained by The Associated Press. The report is to be released Friday.

I hate this agency so much.

They're the worst.

Has their been any follow up on their emergency relocation plans?
The ones related to their final admission that they've been housing hundreds of thousands of people in trailers with dangerously high levels of formaldehyde?
Anything on that?

Death By FEMA All Over Again

The news story reads like a public safety alert:

After downplaying the risks for months, the Federal Emergency Management Agency said Thursday it will rush to move Gulf Coast hurricane victims out of roughly 35,000 government-issued trailers because tests found dangerous levels of formaldehyde fumes.

FEMA Administrator R. David Paulison said the agency hopes to get everyone out and into hotels, motels, apartments and other temporary housing by the summer, when the heat and stuffy air could worsen the problem inside the trailers.

"The real issue is not what it will cost but how fast we can move people out," he said.

-
How fast?

How fast?

Now that's the issue?

Ugh. FEMA, this makes me so mad I could expose you to dangerously high levels of formaldehyde for two or more years... I'm boiling hot right now. I can't even... Let me just swallow it and try to explain without expletives.
-

Okay, so late this week, FEMA determined that the trailers that they distributed to victims of Hurricane Katrina have and always have had dangerously high levels of formaldehyde, a chemical in cigarettes and embalming fluid known to cause cancer, not just in lab rats, but in human beings. The levels are dangerous enough that FEMA has determined that they must IMMEDIATELY relocate vulnerable people: the elderly, children, and anyone with health problems, especially asthma. People will be moved to apartments and hotels as soon as possible, relocations are to begin immediately. Those living in FEMA parks are also especially at risk and those parks will be shut down immediately after the sick and elderly are accounted for. FEMA hopes to have everyone out of trailers within the next few months. The summer heat can exacerbate the risks of formaldehyde exposure.

So how many people does this affect?

One thousand? Five thousand?

No!

There are still more than 100,000 people still living in FEMA trailers all over Louisiana and Mississippi today.

That number does not include the thousands upon thousands more that once did live in FEMA trailers but have since renovated their homes. FEMA trailers have been poisoning Katrina victims since 2005. At one point there were 140,000 occupied FEMA trailers. Because a great deal of those were multiple occupancy units, there must be close to a half million people that spent significant time in a cancer can.

If you've spent even just two weeks inside a FEMA trailer, I'd advise you to contact a doctor and a lawyer. You've been exposed to dangerous levels of cancer-causing chemicals.

The formaldehyde levels in some trailers were found to be high enough to cause breathing problems in children, the elderly or people who already have respiratory trouble, CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding said. About 5 percent had levels high enough to cause breathing problems even in people who do not ordinarily have respiratory trouble, she said.
--
As early as 2006, trailer occupants began reporting headaches, nosebleeds and difficulty breathing.
-

You've gotta give FEMA credit though, right? To find out this information and then take decisive action to relocate people to safer lodging is the right call, isn't it?

Well, it would have been the right decision if they weren't about two and a half years late.
It would have been the right decision if FEMA had indeed just found out about the risk.

They knew about the risk.

A long long time ago.

And they didn't relocate anybody, they didn't replace any trailers. They let thousands and thousands of our neighbors bake in stew of cancer-causing fumes last summer without so much as free paper towels for those experiencing formaldehyde-caused nose bleeds, without free cough drops to those experiencing formaldehyde-caused chronic breathing problems.

Last May, (that was around 8 or 9 months ago, but FEMA's not counting) CBS News obtained an internal FEMA document that lists formaldehyde exposure carrying the risk of cancer as a job hazard for its own employees charged with inspecting the trailers.

The Sierra Club did its own tests of FEMA trailers in May of 2006, almost two years ago now. Out of 32 trailers inspected, 30 were found to have formaldehyde levels above normal.

Here's how an MSNBC story from July of 2006 descibes all that:

Air quality tests of 44 FEMA trailers conducted by the Sierra Club since April have found formaldehyde concentrations as high as 0.34 parts per million – a level nearly equal to what a professional embalmer would be exposed to on the job, according to one study of the chemical’s workplace effects.

And all but four of the trailers have tested higher than the 0.1 parts per million that the EPA considers to be an “elevated level” capable of causing watery eyes, burning in the eyes and throat, nausea, and respiratory distress in some people.

That kind of makes it sound like FEMA was embalming residents of the Gulf Coast, doesn't It?

FEMA felt the pressure. In August of 2006, after the Sierra Club's tests and in the midst of a hot summer that compounded adverse reactions to formaldehyde exposure, FEMA issued a press release outlining their plans to test trailers for their formaldehyde levels. In the mean time, it prescribed methods for those wanting to "reduce their exposure":

• Increase ventilation. Open the windows and door of the trailer and use fans to force stale air out and bring fresh air in.
• Keep indoor temperatures cool. Heat does cause formaldehyde to increase the rate at which it releases fumes, so, after the trailer is well ventilated, keep temperatures cooler with air conditioning.
• Lower the humidity. Like heat, humidity causes formaldehyde to release fumes, so keep the relative humidity at about 40 to 50 percent in the trailer.
• Do not smoke inside. Tobacco smoking releases formaldehyde and other toxic chemicals.

What advice! A brochure given in the middle of August telling people that the best way to reduce exposure to formaldehyde in their homes is by simultaneously opening doors and windows while keeping the trailer temperature and humidity levels low.

Keep the trailer cool and dry with the windows open in the middle of August?

Have they ever been to the Gulf Coast during the month of August?

(That question really pisses me off to ask because we all know that they never have been. They infamously missed the opportunity to come see us late in August of 2005. Nonetheless, the September air is just as hot and just as moist.)

If you open the windows, it's going to get hot and humid in the trailer, you idiots!

And heavens, please don't smoke! You could be exposing yourself to formaldehyde!

So how were people supposed to reduce their exposure again?
-

When the FEMA press release dropped in August of 2006, Congressional Democrats demanded FEMA give up what they knew about formaldehyde. A year later, in July of 2007, that same Congressional Committee held two days of hearings on FEMA's failure to respond to formaldehyde risks. This is from Rep. Waxman's opening statement:

The FEMA documents depict a battle between FEMA field staff, who recognized right away that formaldehyde was a serious problem, and FEMA headquarters, particularly FEMA’s lawyers, who wanted to pretend it didn’t exist.

In March 2006, news articles reported high levels of formaldehyde in FEMA trailers. FEMA field staff urged immediate action, saying: “This needs to be fixed today,” “we need to take a proactive approach,” and there is an “immediate need” for a plan of action.

But when the issue reached FEMA’s lawyers, they blocked testing of occupied trailers. One FEMA attorney explained: “Do not initiate any testing until we give the OK. …Once you get results…the clock is running on our duty to respond to them.”

Another FEMA official wrote: the Office of General Counsel has advised that “we do not do testing” because it “would imply FEMA’s ownership of this issue.”

Early in the process, due to the perseverance of a pregnant mother with a four-month-old child, FEMA did test one occupied trailer. The results showed that their trailer had formaldehyde levels 75 times higher than the maximum workplace exposure level recommended by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

The mother evacuated the trailer. FEMA stopped testing occupied trailers. And top officials issued a statement that said: “FEMA and industry experts have evaluated the small number of cases where odors of formaldehyde have been reported, and we are confident that there is no ongoing risk.”

--

But FEMA knew of formaldehyde exposure problems well before the news media began to publish complaints in March of 2006. They knew of issues as early as December of 2005, and likely before that.

This story, out of Bay St. Louis, Mississippi is especially revealing:

...Jesse Fineran, a former Hancock County Emergency Operations Center hazardous material specialist, said he brought the issue to the attention of numerous federal agencies in the daily meetings Hancock County EOC with government representatives nearly two years ago.

Fineran's involvement began in October 2005, when his wife, who has asthma, needed aid after stepping into the couple's son's FEMA trailer. Fineran received a trailer a couple of months later, where his wife experienced the same problems. Fineran had both his son's trailer and his trailer tested for formaldehyde. He said Tests showed levels of 0.38 and 0.21 parts per million, respectively.

Fineran's son had his trailer replaced and Fineran received a special "product sensitive" trailer. Tests on these were 0.18 and 0.21 parts per million, respectively, Fineran said.
Fineran's wife is now living in Louisiana while Fineran lives in a FEMA trailer in Bay St. Louis.

Tests were done in trailers in November 2005 at a staging lot in Kiln, Fineran said. The tests, conducted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, showed not only above-normal levels in the trailers, but the background level around the staging area was also elevated, Fineran said.

"They knew people were suffering," Fineran said.

On December 14, 2005, a daily report of the meetings made by Fineran stated an official with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration found formaldehyde in FEMA trailers at a Kiln staging area. The data was provided to Bechtel, the contractor responsible for transporting and setup of trailers. Fineran said both Sid Melton, now chief of operations in Mississippi, and Michael Andrews, chief of mobile home operations in Mississippi, received the OSHA report in December 2005.

According to FEMA, a total of 47 trailers – 17 in Mississippi – have been swapped. Fineran said this number is low because FEMA would only replace a trailer after venting and the applicant specifically mentioned formaldehyde. Used trailers were cleaned with an agent that masks the smell of formaldehyde, Fineran said.
-

"FEMA WOULD ONLY REPLACE A TRAILER AFTER VENTING AND THE APPLICANT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED FORMALDEHYDE. USED TRAILERS WERE CLEANED WITH AN AGENT THAT MASKS THE SMELL OF FORMALDEHYDE."

That was way back in 2005. Way, way back in 2005. And people have been living in these trailers for two years since.

FEMA, meanwhile, hurriedly made the decision that they needed to evict residents from trailer parks while they stalled testings responsibilities. This article from late November details those plans and delivers this interesting tidbit:

The agency has been careful not to attribute park closures to concerns about formaldehyde, which has been found at dangerous levels in some trailers. In a "Frequently Asked Questions" flier released Wednesday, a question asked: "Is FEMA closing parks because of formaldehyde?" FEMA answered: "Trailers were intended as short-term housing solutions. Rental resources are increasingly available in Louisiana and are more appropriate for long-term housing."

Testing of local units was scheduled to begin this month but has been postponed. It should begin "very soon," Josephson said.

[Josephson is Bob Josephson, a FEMA spokesperson]
-

Now, the context of that article about the closure of FEMA parks is something I should say more about. That article wasn't primarily about formaldehyde levels. It was about another type of crisis:

FEMA's effectiveness in moving New Orleans residents out of parks is in dispute, and critics acknowledge the situation is complex. The working poor occupy most FEMA trailers, and they may also be grappling with depression, iffy credit and minor criminal records, all of which make apartment hunting more difficult. Caseworkers cited all those issues as complicating factors for departing trailer-park residents, Josephson said.

FEMA caseworkers also had reported that some occupants talked about wanting a rental apartment but then turned down five or six places, Josephson said.

That's that gosh-darn New Orleans affordable housing crisis again!

Originally, the trailer evictions due to occur at the end of this May applied only to the group trailer sites located throughout the state. But FEMA has now finally been pushed to admit that formaldehyde levels are so dangerous that relocations are beginning immediately from both group sites and trailers on private property.

So there are going to be thousands more people looking for affordable housing solutions sooner than anticipated for the month of May.

In November and December I warned that the rush to demolish large expanses of the public housing stock here in New Orleans was fundamentally foolish because, among many many many other reasons, the anticipated May FEMA evictions would add more pressure to what is already an extremely tense affordable housing shortage. Now it seems that emergency is both larger and sooner than the city anticipated. (And it should have been anticipated!)

If Ray "Free Market Recovery" Nagin believed that enough affordable housing would magically come into existence to provide a roof over the head of everyone evicted by May, maybe now he's starting to become concerned about that rosy forecast.

Maybe now he's working round-the-clock with his team to come up with temporary housing for the thousands and thousands of people in and around New Orleans that need to be immediately relocated. Maybe now he's formulating some sort of rent control policy so that prices don't skyrocket with the increased demand. Maybe now he's negotiating with state and federal agencies to secure funding and implementation assistance for what could be another massive displacement of lives.

I know why everybody is laughing (and/or crying)...

It's because we know what the Mayor's plan is already.

It's under the bridge at Claiborne and Canal.
--

FEMA has perpetrated some sort of willful or criminally negligent form of chemical genocide upon hundreds of thousands of people already victimized by the Federal Flood while the municipal government of New Orleans has repeatedly passed on the opportunity to prepare for yet another federally-funded humanitarian crisis that we cannot say was unforeseen.

Has the Mayor or anyone from City Council spoken about what New Orleans is going to do to help people get out of their toxic trailers? Have they spoken about how this will affect the affordable housing crisis? Have they spoken about helping New Orleans citizens exposed to formaldehyde obtain justice against FEMA?

This website, toxictrailers.com has been following the formaldehyde poisoning of Katrina victims for some time they're looking to compile stories from people affected by formaldehyde exposure. They also provide an important list of phone numbers that I will recreate here:

To report formaldehyde problems to FEMA: 1-866-562-2381.

FEMA hotline for emergency housing (only for those with formaldehyde issues): 1-800-621-3362

To request reimbursement from FEMA for medical expenses caused by formaldehyde exposure, fax a letter from doctor along with bills to 1-800-827-8112.

Kits to test trailers for formaldehyde can be purchased from Advanced Chemical Sensors, 561-338-3116. Cost: $34/kit.

Number for FEMA to buy back trailers: 1-866-562-2381 or e-mail FEMA-EHU-DOC@dhs.gov.

Toxic trailer lawsuits:

Buzbee Law Firm, Galveston, Texas , 409-762-5393, http://www.txattorneys.com/

Parker Waichman Alonso Mark LLP, New Orleans, 1-800-LAW-INFO, www.toxicfematrailer.com or www.yourlawyer.com/topics/overview/toxic_fema_trailers

Rodney & Etter, New Orleans, www.toxicfematrailers.org

---

Fuck you, FEMA, fuck you.

David Vitter, You Ain't Cuz You Not - And Other Thoughts On the Public Housing Debate

Yesterday, I said this:

Politicians will be able to further use the media to make the public housing advocates seem like a danger to ordinary New Orleans citizens. I am sure they are already on the horn with the FBI and DHS to prepare for some sort of attack from an unknown enemy that hates the freedom to have a condo. A politician will say something about these safety precautions in front of a camera, thereby reinforcing the supposed legitimacy of "the threat" and the supposed irrationality of the public housing crowd.

Today, New Orleans City Business says this:

Sen. David Vitter, R-Metairie, is calling for a federal investigation into fliers that threaten to destroy a condominium for every unit of public housing destroyed in New Orleans.

"I write to request that you aggressively investigate this matter and take all appropriate law enforcement action," Vitter said today in a letter to Jim Letten, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Louisiana, and James Bernazzani, FBI special agent in charge in New Orleans.

This is juuust great. (h/t: Tim the Nameless)

I think it will be awfully hard for the Coalition to Stop the Demolitions to secure any type of negotiating power given the veracity of the public outcry against them. (Thanks largely to media handling of poster-gate) Public officials will feel totally justified in railroading protesters.

--------

As we have discussed this impending public housing demolition, I have noticed an unfortunate rhetorical pattern that I think it is important to address.

Firstly, I will call myself out.

I don't think I have been particularly comprehensive in my descriptions of "the point" of opposing the demolition of public housing. I believe I have been very passionate in trying to push for solidarity with public housing advocates and residents and I still think we must support our neighbors. I described the demolition plans as racist. I am comfortable alluding to the recent collection of housing-related news as a deliberate scheme to permanently banish the African American working poor, or otherwise make further returns impossible. I through my support behind the Coalition to Stop the Demolitions because I believe that there is a crisis here.

And I have followed up by continuing to link to sites that are directly affiliated with the protest mobilization. And cajoling people to be more active. Others have done the same.
It is not unexpected that, during this week of protests and sensationalized threats, media and blog energy has been focused on the public housing demolition debate. That is the top story and it should be.

Unfortunately, however, in attempts to be forceful and passionate, many parties with opinions on public housing have been forced to fit into two diametrically opposed frames:
You are either for demolition or you are against it.

I have tried to temper this by saying caveatted things like "You must oppose immediate demolition," or "You must be against this demolition until the housing crisis is mitigated."
But I think given the events of the past ten days, the passion, and polarization, my attempts at being "inclusive" via wordplay have been half-assed or otherwise ineffective due to short-sightedness.

Certainly the protests this week are about more than public housing demolition. The issue is so much more complicated than that.

I, myself, have proven that I have complicated feelings on public housing issues. Earlier this fall, I moved to defend River Garden and other mixed-income communities in Philadelphia and criticized the four projects targeted for demolition from a design perspective.

Yet I think others have also been guilty of short-sightedness in regards to this week's public housing debate. I've sensed that people out there are reluctant to take a stand against demolition because they have long supported the demolition of these public housing units. There is a sense that staving off demolition this week represents an endorsement of returning to the pre-Katrina public housing situation, an endorsement of crime-ridden encampments of social and economic isolation. For example, Pistolette (a favorite of mine, sorry to use ya as an example) is "against the rebuilding of those 'concentration camps' known as public housing."

"I simply saw them as a humanitarian disasters based on 'positive' racism - a social disaster perpetuated by the 'well-meaning'... ...We need to socially integrate our low-income residents, not corrall and isolate them from the rest of society so we can forget about them."

Now I agree with that!

But there's a big but. Actually there are few of them.

If you listen to what these public housing advocates are saying, they're not actually demanding a permanent return to the isolated and neglected public housing lifestyle of the past.
There isn't even a whole lot of blistering rhetoric against River Garden or the idea of mixed-income communities. The issue is that even the most rosy projections of HANO and developers indicate that new units will not be livable until 2010. (and of course there won't be any delays or anything in New Orleans)

Housing is an issue that demands immediate attention:

From the December 2nd NY Times: New Orleans rental crisis.
From the November 29th Times-Pic: FEMA to evict trailer residents.
From the November 12th MSNBC: 12,000 homeless in New Orleans.

The stop the demolition movement seems to be much more about forcing government to somehow address the housing crisis BEFORE going ahead with demolition plans, given that many argue these projects could be viable short-term emergency housing options.

There is no reason there can't be compromise on this issue. Why not increase aid vouchers to give people a better chance of finding market apartments? Why not quickly remodel one or two of the project complexes and while taking down the others? Why not force developers and HANO to have a redevelopment contract in place before beginning demolition so that we can guarantee that these land tracts will not sit empty (like Magnolia)? Why not begin a program in which salvageable homes slated for demolition are distributed to working families so that our city is not dismantled into empty lots? I mean have you read what Karen Gadbois has been saying?

This is NOT a debate about whether or not do demolish these projects. This is about a humanitarian housing crisis. This is about a demolition blight crisis. This is about a developers and politicians having do it together crisis. This is about addressing the needs of the people living here.

This is why it is important to support the Coalition to Stop the Demolitions. They are trying to force municipal government to address these things. They are trying to force Ray Nagin, City Council, the US Senate, HUD, and HANO to come up with a plan more sustainable than the current agenda of knocking down the buildings without redevelopment plans in place.

Please, please consider becoming more vocal about the problematic nature of this demolition process. Pay no attention to the man behind the poster. Do not be distracted by the bullshit.
----
You can go here for a list of elected officials to contact and other news about this week's mobilization agenda.

See Ray's letter here.

Here's another place for mobilization news.

-----
Update: I hit publish and saw that two minutes ago Karen Gadbois emailed to say that crews have begun demolitions on C.J. Peete ahead of schedule. Makes me sick!

Update 2: Make that B.W. Cooper

FEMA Comments Deadline

on elevation grants is today, November the 6th. (h/t Gentilly Girl)

Go to here for information on sending a strongly-worded email or fax to FEMA.

HERE is where ya go.

Go here. Boss FEMA around.

People Deserve a Place to Live

How convenient for the Times-Picayune to uncover FEMA's quiet and underhanded closure of New Orleans trailer parks, don't you think?

Essentially, FEMA gave all these folks an eviction notice and a couple of apartment search websites that weren't operational. Read the article, it's devestating.

The people in the trailer parks are having trouble finding affordable housing to move into because rents in New Orleans have increased since the storm.

I don't know if there can be any conclusions drawn to link the story above with the story below.

From Satuday's Times-Picayune:

HANO is failing to provide housing advocates with accurate contact information for former St. Thomas residents, violating an agreement struck in June, said attorney James Perry.

Of the 1,132 addresses of former residents HANO provided, 38 percent stated that the families still lived at St. Thomas, which was demolished in 2001. An additional 20 percent of the contact list states that families live in developments that have been vacant for two years, Perry said.

The inaccuracies call into question HANO's claims that it has plenty of open units that its families either can't or won't return to post-Katrina, Perry said.

HANO maintains it has 400 apartments in its developments ready and waiting until its families can return to New Orleans from cities such as Houston, but the agency hasn't provided a list of addresses for each unit, despite a request by U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La.

And Miss Karen Gadbois provides some interesting photographs of some "properties" HANO might be including in their list of available vacancies.

So just to recap:

FEMA is kicking people out on the streets from trailer parks in spite of past indications the parks would be open into 2009. HANO is demolishing public housing projects that could be quickly renovated and inhabited. Those being kicked to the curb by FEMA can't find affordable housing. HANO insists that they have many affordable housing vacancies that aren't being filled and this is why it is no big deal to move ahead with the demolitions. HANO will not provide anyone with a list of available vacant properties. Karen provides photos of HANO-owned blight.

Our neighbors deserve homes! What's the problem here?