Taking it to the streets

Worcester residents come together to rid their neighborhoods of crime and drugs. They do it without City Hall help.

by Kristen Lombardi

HAWLEY STREET IN Piedmont. The afternoon is cold and wet, but despite the unfavorable elements, pandemonium persists. Teenagers strut along, swilling from bottles. Children romp in overgrown lots, among mattresses and carts, beside haunting remnants of three-decker homes.

Two blocks east, on Chatham Street in Crown Hill, a strapping man grunts as he collects rubbish from another lot. He moves, as if in an obstacle course, around tires and hobbyhorses, oblivious to the stench.

Six blocks northwest, on Pelham Street in the Pleasant-Russell-Elm-Park (PREP) area, more children play in rubble, the aftermath of a fire that demolished three homes years ago. Down the road, a boom-boom beat resonates from a building, the latest site of weapons-related arrests.

Players may change from Piedmont to Crown Hill to PREP neighborhoods, but the blight and chaos remain. Prostitution, drugs, violence, trash, abandoned buildings, vacant parcels -- all have marked the areas as lost causes in the eyes of Worcester's community-at-large. The problems, typical of inner-city neighborhoods, stem from an economic boom in the 1980s, when homeowners sold property at a rapid rate.

"The neighborhood was in good shape, until property owners went to the suburbs. Absentee landlords came, adversity followed," says Jim Connolly, PREP chairman and Townsend Street resident for nearly 20 years.

Today, only 10 percent of housing in the three neighborhoods is owner-occupied. Besides the crime and neglect that can result from absent proprietors, the localities must overcome poverty (29 percent), unemployment (20 percent), business turnover (every two months, it's estimated, an establishment goes under), and problems associated with an ethnically fragmented population.

Revitalization here would be a feat, for sure, and not simply because of these conditions. Many residents blame apathetic Worcester officials for the decline, believing that the city has abandoned them and instead doled out resources to more high-profile, impoverished areas like Main South. As one Irving Street organizer says, "the city placates with promises, then gives the neighborhoods just enough money to keep them from blowing up." Were it not for an increasing number of ardent activists then, the neighborhoods might face a much larger challenge -- despair.

---

City Manager Thomas Hoover's neighborhood cabinet may be a move forward, but lacks it a fundamental ingredient -- residents.

---

In an unique display of collaboration, though, members of Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP neighborhood associations have spearheaded a grassroots campaign to "create a safe, attractive, and livable community." And in the process, they're infusing the areas with a new sense of hope.

"Our problems haven't changed," says Marge Purves, Crown Hill Neighborhood Association president. "But now there is something positive, a critical mass of people who want change."

Back in 1994, Piedmont was a mecca for drugs. Nights, in particular, attracted a shady, intimidating crowd. Outsiders cruised Newbury and Hawley streets looking to buy dope. Dealers whistled catcalls, transactions occurred in front of children.

"Trafficking was too blatant to ignore," says Steve Hill, a Piedmont resident for five years.

The fact that the drug trade had closed in on the Hill family prompted Steve and his wife, Olga Lopez-Hill, to gather neighbors in an attempt to reclaim their streets. They formed a crime watch, the foundation of Piedmont Crime Prevention Team.

"At first, we reacted to crime," Lopez-Hill says. But once illicit dealings became less prevalent, residents assumed a proactive role. "Now we try to prevent crime and better the neighborhood," she adds.

In keeping with this philosophy, Piedmont activists educated themselves on government workings. They met politicians, attended council meetings. Soon they organized grassroots efforts: clean-ups, recreational programs. Last year, PCPT raised $6000 to support projects like a youth-baseball league, and family outings to the ocean.

The activism's manifested itself in the landscape. Residents converted an empty lot on Hawley Street into a community garden, where they cultivate broccoli, radishes, peppers. Even in winter, although muddied and barren, the garden remains remarkably clean -- a testament to its significance as a neighborhood sanctuary.

Just as crime stoked action in Piedmont, so too did PREP mobilize around a notorious drug house, 63 Russell Street. Tenants had made no secret of their trade; when cars pulled into the driveway, marijuana bags would fall from windows. "It was a virtual supermarket," recalls Norma Connolly, a PREP member.

Connolly and her husband, Jim, called neighbors, formed the Pleasant-Russell-Elm-Park (Elm Park/PREP+) association, then set to work on 63 Russell. The activists were diligent. They scribbled down license-plate numbers, videotaped the premises, even chartered a bus to Brookline to picket the home of Allan Kupelnick, the landlord.

The dealers were eventually evicted, and Attorney General Scott Harshbarger's office fined Kupelnick $4000 for negligence.

While the Russell Street saga generated PREP activism, the group's now expanded its scope. It pays teenagers $5 an hour to work with the elderly and clean the streets, for instance.

Norma explains, "The issues snowballed. We want to improve housing, plant trees, update the neighborhood."

Even Crown Hill, with its historic, Greek Revival homes, has witnessed enough rot to spark action. In the past 20 years, Crown Hill association's focused on beautification, such as pruning trees. Recently, though, it's fought to clean the streets of prostitutes, dealers, gangs.

"We had to broaden our scope. Bad things were happening," Purves, the association president, says.

All the while, they've striven for conservation of homes, many of which were built in 1850s. Take 7 Crown Street, an austere, pre-Civil War house that was bought by "an elusive guy," Purves says. Soon the roof caved in, the interior was gutted. Activists pushed the city to act and, because of back taxes, it gained possession of the house.

That residents have accomplished all this, through sheer drive and ingenuity, is a tribute to a belief in activism. And they have, undoubtedly, made a difference. But despite efforts, Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP neighborhoods continue to struggle.

Rather than plod along in insular fashion, residents have recognized that the neighborhoods battle similar problems. To better realize their vision -- namely, a safe, attractive, stable community -- about 100 Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP members heightened grassroots efforts by pooling their resources and forming Downtown Neighborhood Partners.

Since last year, the group's identified needs and devised a comprehensive master plan. Members are currently organizing tenants and designing initiatives, such as a neighborhood center, economic-development strategies, and youth-recreation programs.

Such collaboration, not surprisingly, has had a powerful effect on residents. Reverend Walter Tilleman, Pleasant Street Baptist Church pastor and Partners organizer, offers this observation, "The community's come together to tackle its problems, and this gives everyone a sense that we have control over our destinies."

RESIDENTS MAY FEEL self-assured nowadays, and surely, since the neighborhoods all border Pleasant Street, collaboration allows for a global, proactive approach to renewal. But more important, Downtown Neighborhood Partners attempts to provide three small, relatively obscure associations with the clout needed to move forward.

As the adage goes, power comes in numbers. This, at least, is the rationale of activists like Jim Connolly, who says, "Change may happen slowly, but a united approach helps to get the city's attention."

Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP residents know too well what it means to vie for such attention. When it comes to dealing with officials, residents have long felt as if they're slamming against a wall. Their frustrations quickly become amplified by watching the active role residents have played in the transformations of other industrial cities in the region and across the nation. What the Worcester activists really want is to set the agenda for their neighborhoods or, at a minimum, assist the city in furthering revitalization. Instead, they say, they're forced to fight for basic city services. Crown Hill, for instance, suggested a cooperative solution to a need for brick-sidewalk repairs; if the city provided materials, residents would do labor. But officials declined the offer. Meanwhile, after years of lobbying aggressively for tree-pruning services, Crown Hill residents gave up recently and raised $2000 for a contractor.

"We do get tired of waiting for the city," Purves says.

Piedmont, the poorest of the neighborhoods, has grown more accustomed to the wait; a number of PCPT projects were halted due to inadequate funding. Residents tried to convert an empty Hawley Street lot into a basketball court, for example. They raised money to pave it and put up backboards, but needed more for security. They turned to the city, then quit once, as one resident says, "We got worried that officials would give us something, then tell us we didn't need the Beaver Brook [courts]."

It would be unfair to paint officials as unwilling to help. The city's given the associations $1000 grants and helped to install running water at the community garden. It set aside $28,500 for recreational greenspace in Piedmont in 1996; but the project, which was estimated to cost $100,000, has yet to get underway. After years of grassroots lobbying, the city's recently vowed to eliminate one-way traffic on Pleasant Street as well.

Still, as Kevin Ksen, a highly vocal activist who was recently appointed PCPT chairman, says, "the city only gives minimal support, and we're not happy with that."

---

What the Worcester activists really want is to set the agenda for their neighborhoods or, at a minimum, assist the city in furthering revitalization.

---

Even promising endeavors have ended in discouraging ways. Like the time the city's Office of Planning and Community Development launched a Piedmont neighborhood-revitalization initiative. Residents spent months with a city planner, cataloguing problems, developing strategies for economic-development, public safety, and so on.

By all accounts, the process was impressive. Instead of dictating a solution, officials listened and included residents' ideas in the "Piedmont Initiative" document, a hefty, comprehensive report.

On paper, the initiative appears to contain all the appropriate elements for renewal. Yet officials have allowed it to collect dust for several years, rather than push for implementation. The experience's sent a strong message to residents -- don't count on the city to carry out initiatives.

"OPCD's work was done as soon as the report was published, and to stop [like that] is a dead-end," Pastor Tilleman says.

Although the much-needed Piedmont Initiative stalled in implementation, residents here have watched larger, more influential neighborhood efforts flourish. The City Manager's Advisory Committee on Beacon-Brightly has received as much as $25,000 from the city for revitalization. And Clark University, through its $7 million University Park Neighborhood Restoration Partnership, a wide-ranging approach to reviving Main South, has leveraged local, state, and federal dollars; the city allots money annually to Main South Community Development Corporation (Main South CDC), a nonprofit organization devoted to that neighborhood's renewal, as part of the University Park Partnership. This year, Main South CDC received $124,000 from the city.

Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP neighborhoods haven't any formal CDCs, but the city does funnel federal block-grant money into two area agencies, Worcester Common Ground and Worcester Community Housing Resources. Still, WCG only received $72,000 in funds. And while the city handed $131,000 to WCHR, it's difficult to determine how much is directed at the Pleasant Street areas. WCHR projects are citywide; the latest affordable-housing effort is on King Street in Main South.

For residents, the reason for the discrepancies is simple: "Politics is about allocating resources, and we don't have political power," Hill says.

Now that activists formed DNP, a move intended to bolster their influence, they're rediscovering familiar barriers -- countless meetings with the same officials, promises without results, even officials who get "pissed off" whenever activists disagree with city plans.

Residents acknowledge city constraints, especially with regard to funding, and this is why DNP activists have furthered renewal on their own. Recently, in an attempt to attain trash receptacles for Pleasant Street, activists solicited help from Worcester Regional Transit Authority, which then agreed to buy 20 bins. Residents asked the city for support, suggesting that it empty receptacles, but met resistance.

"We would like the city to empty [bins] in spirit of cooperation, but [officials] say if they do this, they'll have to do the same for all neighborhoods," Norma Connolly says.

Politics essentially is behind city resistance, activists say, a mindset that prevents officials from focusing on a neighborhood, regardless of its needs, because services can't be replicated for all. To realize this, activists add, is to recognize that officials aren't as sincere about renewal as they appear.

One resident, asking to remain anonymous, concludes, "We create initiatives to do our part, and then the city puts in its heels. Officials say they want a partnership, but that hasn't panned out."

IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, as officials touted the virtues of neighborhood revitalization, residents watched tens of millions of local dollars go toward downtown-renewal projects like Union Station. Money allotted to neighborhood ventures, such as housing rehabilitation or youth services, didn't nearly match the rhetoric.

If residents are angered by this gap, officials admit they empathize.

No doubt, as Worcester's forwarded its downtown agenda, neighborhoods have been overlooked. Now, OPCD director Stephen O'Neil acknowledges, "the city must put money where its mouth is."

This is exactly why the city allotted tax-levied dollars for extensive sidewalk repair this year, O'Neil says. And why City Manager Thomas Hoover convened a neighborhood cabinet, which consists of department heads, to better coordinate services. That the cabinet's met monthly since its inception late last year is proof of the city's commitment to neighborhood revitalization, officials say.

Perhaps the most visible evidence of an attempt to prioritize neighborhoods is Mayor Raymond Mariano's critical-corridor initiative, a development effort that focuses on streets feeding into downtown. This, Mariano says, "is a way of spreading success from downtown into neighborhoods. It allows the city to look at and then work on defined areas."

With this rationale in mind, officials identified the major roads leading downtown -- Highland, Chandler, North Main, South Main, Shrewsbury, and Pleasant streets, for instance. Officials have met with residents, proprietors, and institutional leaders from three targeted areas; Hoover's already sent "action plans" for Shrewsbury and South Main streets to city councilors for consideration.

Even though the initiative represents the city's first full-blown, neighborhood-development effort, DNP activists don't find much solace in it. Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP areas will likely benefit from a Pleasant Street plan, but critics point to what they call "nickel-and-dime revitalization," such as installing planters on South Main Street, and repairing sidewalks on Shrewsbury Street, as evidence of the city's tokenism.

"It's nice to hang up banners but that isn't revitalization. It's an effort to placate residents and nothing more," says one DNP organizer, who asked to remain anonymous.

Mariano, who says he's "delighted" that DNP activists are demanding more from government, considers the corridor initiative an attempt "to enhance what's already going on in neighborhoods and respond to [residents'] priorities." If citizens want aesthetic upgrades like benches, the city plans to respond.

Besides, Mariano adds, "The corridor initiative isn't the end of neighborhood revitalization. It's a systematic step away from downtown into neighborhoods, and then we'll branch out further."

In fact, O'Neil notes, the anticipated Pleasant Street plan would incorporate aspects of OPCD's Piedmont Initiative. Whatever residents wish to implement immediately, the corridor plan would highlight. This way, the city can finally fund pieces of the larger Piedmont effort -- proving, in essence, it hasn't forgotten these neighborhoods.

"The city fell short in implementing the initiative, but hasn't abandoned it," O'Neil says. Once the city puts resources into it, he adds, "we can show residents that we take them seriously."

Even so, officials say, the city cannot implement neighborhood-revitalization projects alone. The Piedmont Initiative, if fully funded, would cost the city $20 million, O'Neil estimates. Not only is money not readily available, but the city doesn't have the "luxury" of concentrating its resources in one neighborhood.

This practice, officials insist, has to do with policy, not politics. Worcester has its share of dilapidated areas; there's Main South, Green Island, Belmont Hill, and so on. To avert the spread of decline, the city must examine general issues, such as housing or community-policing, and then divvy up resources equitably.

As Janice Nadeau, district four councilor whose district includes Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP neighborhoods, explains, "It is wrong to think that the city will hand over a million dollars to upgrade one neighborhood. There's a whole inner circle of depressed neighborhoods that the city must focus on."

ACROSS AMERICA, especially in Midwestern and Northeastern states, cities are devising strategies for neighborhood renewal. And, ever since the withering of federal assistance, they're availing the latest in funding mechanisms -- public-private partnerships.

"The trend in community revitalization [efforts] partner governments, foundations, and residents," says Ed Goetz, a University of Minnesota professor who studies urban-development projects.

Successful efforts, overwhelmingly, have made use of such partnerships. Take Sandtown-Winchester in Baltimore, Maryland, a neighborhood that suffered high unemployment (22 percent) six years ago. In 1990, Baltimore city officials formed a partnership with the national Enterprise Foundation and Sandtown residents to turn the tide of violence, disinvestment, decay.

Today, experts hail Sandtown-Winchester as a model for renewal. In seven years, residents have seen a 20 percent drop in violent crime, 1600 refurbished homes, and 750 new jobs.

The achievements stem from several, essential elements, experts say. For one, the partnership funneled millions of dollars into community-based planning over a three-year period. The result was comprehensive, examining education, housing, health care, and youth services.

In addition, because of city and foundation connections, the Sandtown project boasts high-powered leadership. This has enabled it to quickly garner critical, outside resources from state and federal governments, as well as smaller foundations.

Perhaps most important, experts say, the partnership taps into a strong, grassroots base that already existed. Residents pushed the city to get involved in 1990 and continue to drive the initiative today. Not only are activists planning, they've also been given unprecedented say in neighborhood-school curriculum, hiring, even budgeting.

"Successful revitalization comes when the people who live there have a stake in projects," Goetz says. Just as activists need institutional support (read: money), cities need resident involvement, he adds.

To be sure, the secret to revitalization is sustained effort. And residents, who live with daily reminders of neighborhood blight, are more likely to remain committed to projects until they're carried out. Even Worcester officials agree, citizens are vital. Mariano says, "The key to revitalization is an excited, enthusiastic group of neighbors."

Knowing this, Worcester officials say, the city's tried hard to encourage community activism in recent years. Mariano boasts of conducting more mayor's walks through Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP neighborhoods than any other -- an indication that he respects activists, he says.

Even though the walks have raised city awareness of chronic problems, activists argue that the events are ineffective. At a recent discussion of an upcoming, June walk, one man with furrowed brow noted that residents have escorted officials through the areas four times already; "We've been doing this for years and nothing has changed," he added.

Officials counter that the overall rise in neighborhood groups in the past five years has definitely prompted them to change. More than ever, officials are now hosting neighborhood meetings, listening to residents, establishing cooperative connections.

"Residents have made headway but don't see it as such," Nadeau says.

There is little question among DNP activists that the city's bettered community relations. Yet too often, they don't feel the kind of inclusion that the city espouses. Case in point: the city's $1.2 million signage project. Piedmont, Crown Hill, and PREP residents had no idea the city would be installing huge, 18-foot-high signs that give airport directions in their neighborhoods until recently, when concrete, thigh-high bases were erected along Pleasant and Irving streets. That citizens weren't notified beforehand of city plans is enough to infuriate residents.

Mary Keefe, a Crown Hill activist, says, "The signs aren't sensitive to people who live here, or to neighborhood scale. They're a symbol of where planning and development really is."

What residents ultimately get from officials are flashes of empowerment, chances to air grievances, offer suggestions, create priority lists. But for DNP activists to transform their neighborhoods, they need decision-making authority, political advocacy, capital.

The city is less willing to risk such empowerment, it seems. City Manager Hoover's neighborhood cabinet may be a move forward, but lacks a fundamental ingredient -- residents.

Even though a model already exists, with Greater Worcester Community Foundation's Neighborhood Forum, a group of residents, agencies, and officials who meet to discuss issues, the city chose not to include citizens on its cabinet, thereby denying them authority.

This reluctance to empower residents, coupled with a myopic, political mindset, has prevented Worcester from recognizing the obvious: DNP activists have exhibited the diligence and commitment that are critical to a successful public-private partnership around renewal. What the equation lacks is a passionate Worcester official, ready to help them leverage the capital and clout needed to move forward.

"It would be exciting to see officials get beyond the `We-can't-do-that-for-your-neighborhood' mentality and take a risk. For an official to step forward, that would be empowerment," Keefe explains.

If officials were sincere in their talk, they might recognize that an opportunity for genuine partnership awaits them. n

Kristen Lombardi can be reached at klombardi[a]phx.com

---

Meanwhile, across town

Worcester has seen a rise in resident organizing, mostly in the form of neighborhood crime watches. Today, it's estimated that 30 crime watches meet monthly throughout the city. A smaller number of groups, identified as neighborhood associations, have broader agendas. Here is a look at what some associations are working on.

Green Island Residents Group The neighborhood has been trying to recover from its bisection by Route 290. Committed to neighborhoods youngsters, citizens are working to eliminating drug traffic.

Castle Street (Beacon Brightly) Fueled by a $25,000 grant from the city, this aggressive residents association will use the money to build a new community garden at Oread Place. Other plans include the renovation of Castle Street row houses.

Columbus Park Crime is their primary concern; citizens have invited police officers from the auto-theft unit to speak on prevention.

Quinsigamond Village Immediate aims are economic revitalization of Millbury Street. Citizens say this improvement will create a "homier" neighborhood that will help to expel crime.

Hitchcock Road On April 4th, residents celebrated Earth Day with Holy Cross volunteers, who helped with bagging, raking, and spring clean-up. On the 21st, there is a fire-prevention meeting at St. Peter's Hall; and on May 5th there are neighborhood plans for hired trucks to sweep the streets clear of winter debris.

Clifton/Oberlin/Hollywood A grant from the Worcester Foundation will help pay kids who perform odd jobs for residents. Dedicated with protecting youth, citizens have already driven out a gang and prostitution and drug dealers through a system of monitoring, successful through their partnership with the police.

Hawthorn to May streets Confronted with an outbreak of auto vandalism and the spread of gang influence, citizens attend to "watching each other's backs." The agenda: additional police patrolling, diminish prostitution.

Britton Square Revitalization for these citizens means filling potholes and re-cementing crumbling curbs; landscape changes will be forthcoming, too. Quick solutions to traffic and parking problems have made this a good business climate.

Preston Street Organizers have planned to clean up vacant lots and will ask the city to replace these eyesores with swing sets, benches, and gardens. A neighborhood supper at the YMCA has also been planned.

Shephard/King Neighborhood Association Residents have made it their mandate to combat crime. Monitoring has been moderately effective in identifying and casting out undesirables; however, recent shootings like King Street's have made activism difficult.

-- compiled by Eric Bovim

Kristen Lombardi can be reached at klombardi[a]phx.com.