Tuesday, October 24, 2006

ameriKa

RENTERS SCREWED IN KATRINA AID

NY TIMES - As billions in housing aid begins to flow here in the next
few weeks, most of it will go to homeowners, who have been appointed by
city officials as the true architects of this city's recovery, despite
the fact that roughly half the city's residents rented housing before
Hurricane Katrina. The renters of New Orleans, it seems, are on their
own. Rents are skyrocketing across the city, up an average of 39 percent
since Hurricane Katrina. The city has announced that it plans to
refurbish only a small fraction of its traditional public housing units.
Some neighborhoods are campaigning to tear down sturdy apartment
buildings and build parks in their place. Though some aid has been set
aside for landlords, many lower-income residents who say they are unable
to return have been priced out. . . From a renter's point of view, New
Orleans has become off-limits to all but prosperous tenants, as rents
have increased significantly in the pockets of the city that did not
flood. Before the storm, the fair market rent for a two-bedroom unit in
the city was $676; it is now $940, according to the Brookings
Institution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/us/nationalspecial/17rent.html?ref=us

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

COURT RULES POLICE ABUSE MATTERS SHOULD BE KEPT SECRET

SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE - A recent state Supreme Court ruling has
brought at least a temporary halt to public police-misconduct
proceedings in San Francisco and Oakland while those cities determine
whether the decision prevents them from naming accused officers or
detailing the charges against them. Officials in the two cities have put
cases on hold while they determine whether the public and media still
have the right to know the specifics of charges and attend disciplinary
hearings. Police unions say such details are personnel matters and
should remain private, along with the officers' names. Citizen monitor
groups insist that the public has the right to know when police are
accused of misconduct. The questions were raised by a Supreme Court
ruling Aug. 31 siding with a fired San Diego County sheriff's deputy who
sought to keep details of his termination appeal confidential. The court
said state law requires police personnel records to be kept private by
an officer's "employing agency," which included a commission hearing an
officer's appeal.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/15/BAG75L6BJI1.DTL

1 comment:

R2K said...

: )