Opinion: About Those Green Street Conversations

The following was submitted by Bobbye Knoll Peterson. Peterson has been extensively engaged within the Green Street neighborhood.
----------------------
The future of the building at 51 Green Street has been much belabored recently. The voices that have risen to the top seem to have created a narrative that this conversation is only about St. Vincent DePaul and Middletown Green Community Center. What has been lost in the cacophony of what is right for the space and the neighborhood is the voice of many of the residents in nearest proximity to 51 Green Street.

After Wesleyan University vacated the Green Street Teaching and Learning Center space, the City laid out a process for request for proposals (RFP) for new use of the building at 51 Green Street. St. Vincent DePaul (SVDP) was one of the three groups who submitted a request for the space. SVPD followed the steps the City laid out and was fairly awarded the space. Where the process went wrong was the lack of direct engagement with the twenty plus families who live on Green Street. Yes, there were community meeting facilitated by NEAT and attended by a few members of the Common Council, but there was no targeted recruitment of residents on Green and Ferry Streets and SVDP, though invited, was not in attendance. Direct engagement with residents on Green Street should have been a priority in these conversations. City leaders and those with proposals to utilize the space should have participated. SVDP has not shared their plans for the space with residents on Green and Ferry Street and allowed them the opportunity to express concerns, ask questions, and give feedback.

The voices that came out of the existing process have become those of advocates for the Middletown Green Community Center, another group that submitted an application in response to the RFP. MGCC is an idea to create a grass-roots, community-driven learning center in Middletown that focuses on information technology, healthy living, and the arts. Advocates for MGCC have claimed that the “state of the art” facility at 51 Green Street should be awarded to them. While in theory I certainly support art, technology, and healthy living spaces, I simply don’t see a path to sustainability in the current plan for MGCC. A few of the key facts in the MGCC argument for how they can provide programming and why the are the right choice are fundamentally flawed.

1. 51 Green Street is no longer a state of the art arts and technology space. 15 years ago Wesleyan university invested in making the space state of the art. The technology was never replaced or upgraded in the subsequent 15 years. Anything that was there at the end of the Green Street Teaching and Learning Center was obsolete or nearing obsoletion. Furthermore, the majority of what was there when the space was the Green Street Teaching and Learning Center has been removed. The argument that it would be a waste of resources to utilize this space for something other than an Arts and Tech space is incorrect. 
2. MGCS does not have a monetary commitment from Wesleyan University. The proposed budget and plan for programming laid out in the RFP by MGCC requires some funding from Wesleyan University. The University has not committed to providing this funding. The current budget laid out by MGCS is not realistic. As someone who was involved with the Green Street Arts Center as they worked diligently to try and find ways to make the space sustainable, I am confident that the budget on the MGCC web page is not a viable plan to support the programming proposed. MGCC has failed to demonstrate a financial commitment from anyone that would support the proposed programming. The partners that MGCS has named don’t have the budget or capacity to support MGCC proposed programming. 
3. MGCC asserts that the loss of Green Street Teaching and Learning Center  left a hole in arts programming in the North End of Middletown and City wide, when in fact, Oddfellows Playhouse Youth Theater runs a vibrant youth arts program just a couple of blocks from the Green Street Space. Oddfellows has always provided generous scholarship support to participants in need and offers a variety of arts based programming after school and on weekends. The City recently acquired the building at 128 Washington Street that house Oddfellows programs investing in arts programming in the North End.  
4. MGCC has used an “us vs. them” narrative that is unfair to residents. After the meetings on Wednesday night supporters of MGCC were overheard saying “we stopped them”. Vilifying the staff, volunteers, and patrons of SVDP is not a healthy narrative for the neighborhood and doesn’t express the views of many of the residents in that area. 

MGCC has centered this unsustainable vision and minimized the voices of many those whose voices should be magnified in this conversation. Residents have been promised something that does not exist, and to continue to allow them to lead the conversation does a disservice to the residents of Green and Ferry Street. To move forward in this conversation we need to be very clear that unless MGCC can present a plan that demonstrates commitment and funding that they no longer have a stake in the conversation. We need to center the voices of North End Residents on Green and Ferry Street.

Residents in surrounding areas to 51 Green Street have valid concerns about the programs at St. Vincent DePaul being relocated to Green Street. These concerns should be heard before any plan moves forward. To ignore the concerns of the neighbors and move forward sets the stage for an adversarial relationship that does not need to exist. Residents should not be made to feel like the move of programs at SVDP to 51 Green Street is yet another thing that the City has done “for the neighborhood” without real input “from the neighborhood”.

In another example of residents being portrayed as against one and other, some supporters of SVDP have painted this as a “Not In My Back Yard” (NIMBY) argument.Trying to make this a typical NIMBY argument is unfair. This is not about residents being concerned with “those people” suddenly being in their neighborhood, as has been suggested.This is not a neighborhood that is worried about something sullying their pristine view. This is a neighborhood that has a unique location, a unique set of challenges, and has earned the right to question the motives of the City and any potential partners. This is the same neighborhood that was sold a boat full of promises about the management, care, and upkeep of Wharfside Commons and has seen nearly none of them fulfilled. This neighborhood has the right to be concerned. Their concern may very well have nothing to do with the patrons of the soup kitchen. It might have everything to do with promises that haven’t been kept in the past and concern about a process that has been flawed.

I believe that no vote should occur on Monday evening and that the Mayor, members of the Common Council, and leadership at St. Vincent DePaul should have an opportunity to have a facilitated conversation with residents of Green and Ferry Street. The neighborhood should have a chance to express concerns and SVDP should have an opportunity to present their plan and listen to feedback from residents. This doesn’t have to be a display of who can bring out the most folks to a council meeting, when it can simply be a conversation between neighbors that is long overdue.

Bobbye Knoll Peterson

Former Director of the North End Action Team
Former Advisor of the After School Program at GSAC
Former Lots of things at Oddfellows, including Director of After School Programs
Former Ice Cream Scooper Extraordinaire.