Number one: Every time our people go to Washington on behalf of New Orleans, someone in Congress says, “We’ve given you $110 billion dollars. That ought to be enough!” Here’s why it isn’t.
That amount was for five states to cover the damage from 3 storms. Louisiana had the worst damage, so we got the lion’s share: $59 billion. That’s a lot of money. However….
According to the Louisiana Recovery Authority, the governor’s agency charged with handling the money congress sends this way, only $26.4 billion of that represented “genuine federal help.” Of that amount, $18 billion was for actual disaster relief–which includes money to rebuild levees, homes, schools, and community infrastructure–and $14.7 billion was for payouts from federal flood insurance, which is a contract the federal program has with policyholders who pay their premiums.
Representative Richard Baker of Baton Rouge says, “A lot has been said about the $110 billion. We just haven’t seen it.”
In response, Washington argues that it sent $12 billion to the governor’s Road Home program for assistance with rebuilding homes in our state, but as of Thursday only 590 people had received anything from it, for a total of $38.3 million.
Alabama Representative Spencer Bachus quotes our governor as saying last year that the president had done everything he promised and that the money was enough. “You’re quoting her out of context,” says LRA exec Walter Leger. He points out that of the $110 billion sent this way, barely more than half of it came to Louisiana–the other four states getting the other $51 billion–and yet Louisiana had four times the damage as the others states. “That’s what people ought to be looking at,” said Leger.
There’s a strong feeling among this state’s leadership that Mississippi fared better because of its political clout in Washington, having a Republican governor while our governor is a Democrat. In December of 2005, Mississippi received $5.2 billion for emergency housing recovery while Louisiana, with many times the damage, received $6.2 billion.
Number two: There’s a big front page article in Sunday’s paper about this city’s mayor. The headline reads: “Many New Orleanians say they are still waiting for Mayor C. Ray Nagin to do the job they elected him to do.” A local t-shirt reads: “C. Ray?” And underneath: “Not lately.”
The paper calls this Nagin’s first extensive interview in months. Basically what he says is that his criticism is coming from the 48 percent who voted against him, not the 52 percent of supporters. Which means he discounts it, instead of hearing the anguish of our citizens and trying to learn from the criticism.
A new critic of the mayor’s is the guy who oversaw his two mayoral campaigns, Jim Carvin, described as “the grizzled New Orleans political strategist.” In September he told Newsweek that Nagin had wasted a “marvelous opportunity, having won the election against all odds, to try to pull it together and exhibit all the qualities a leader should have.” Up until he said that, Carvin was an adviser for Nagin. No more. The mayor, he don’t like people saying bad things to him.
The paper says it’s not like Nagin doesn’t have ideas for this city, he has had plenty over his years in City Hall. He calls a news conference and announces them with a flourish, but they never get off the ground.
Perhaps the crux of the problem is that Mr. Nagin is an accountant. He’s using to crunching numbers, and some have given him high marks for keeping the city solvent through this difficult time. But instead of being a real leader, he is said to be a tinkerer, one more comfortable with tweaking processes and managing spreadsheets that being a visionary who can inspire the populace to rise up and build.
Back in the winter following Katrina, here in this blog and elsewhere, much was made of the mayor’s blue-ribbon panel called the Bring New Orleans Back Commission. Members interviewed and studied and finally issued a great report on every facet of this city’s rebuilding. The report now gathers dust on a shelf in his office.
After his re-election last year, Nagin did a truly astounding thing: he disappeared. We would read of him speaking in San Diego, in Chicago, Baltimore, Indianapolis, wherever. He was all over the map. Listen to him and he will say he was out raising support for New Orleans. But scrutinize each appearance and you’ll get a different story. At one, he was raising support for his campaign coffers, even though he’d already won and get not be elected again. At another, he addressed a meeting of Black Journalists, and in another, he told how to avoid chaos in the wake of a disaster. As if he knew.
Local talk radio host Garland Robinette dubbed the mayor, “Ray Nay-Gone.” Cheron Brylski, a freelance political consultant who served as press secretary to former Mayor Dutch Morial, is quoted: “Ray Nagin is the worst kind of politician in my opinion, because he lacks real vision for this community while he refuses to give up any responsibility to those who may offer a vision.”
Mr. Nagin himself says he should be judged after the story of New Orleans is over. He’s confident the records will indicate he was the right man for the right job.
We’ll see. I hope he’s right.
Number three: Perhaps most bizarre of all is the argument raging between former residents of four housing developments that are slated to be destroyed and the Housing Authority of New Orleans. Saturday, a small group of former residents re-entered the C. J. Peete Development in Central City, in spite of its being locked down tight.
HANO says Katrina ended the useful lifespan of these four housing areas which it now wants to demolish and replace with multi-income planned housing. These buildings had been deteriorating for decades, it says. As for the Peete project, a study just released concluded that this housing development suffers from “high density, overpopulated unites, deteriorated buildings and infrastructure, obsolete building components, hazardous building materials, mold that started growing years ago, and too much lead dust to pass basic screening tests.” In other words, tear it down.
The paper says prior to Katrina, residents of these developments paid an average monthly rent of $85 which included utilities. Right. Eighty-five dollars. No wonder they want back in.
What gets me is that the former residents insist they have a right to such subsidized housing. That translates to other taxpayers having the obligation to take care of them.
I confess I do not understand such reasoning.
Residents have filed a federal lawsuit against HANO to block the closing of public housing and the demolition of these buildings. A judge has thrown out several aspects of the suit, and affirmed HANO’s actions as not racially discriminatory. He has ruled that the lawsuit may proceed, however, and stated that only the courts can decide whether HANO has the right to proceed with its plans.
We’ve reported here previously that a small group of protestors moved into the St. Bernard Housing Development last month. A police SWAT team flushed them out in the wee hours of the morning, arresting two activists and charging them with criminal damage. St. Bernard is empty and secure once more.
“It’s my home,” insisted one of the trespassers at the C. J. Peete development. “And we are here until hell freezes over.” With no power, no utilities, and no legal right to be there, I seriously doubt that.
Originally, Peete was built to accommodate 1,300 families on its 40 acres, but even prior to Katrina only 144 family units were living there. It was built in 1941, with more apartments added in the 1950s. No doubt Peete and the other three developments slated for demolition met a great housing need then, but HANO says it’s time to tear them down. Stay tuned.