Search

second thoughts on willowick

mikefortun
Annotation of
In response to

Katie Cox Shrader10:44 AM Today@kimfortun@uci.edu I know what you mean about that anxiety. Two thoughts: 

- Re working with urban planners and others on gentrification: Santa Ana has a long, rich history of anti-gentrification organizing, and many of the groups involved in those have worked with UCI including planners. I recall from my time working with Montoya that some of the politics there are sensitive. I think an important next step is to be researching/documenting some of that history and reaching out to groups like el Centro Cultural de México and the Kennedy Commission. Maybe the OC library archive too. It seems really important to include gentrification as a central part of our analysis of EiJ in SA and I think we have a lot to learn from them. Those conversations may give us some insight into how outside planners might help or support, and how they might already be doing so.

- This kind of discursive risk does seem really important to track... AB 617 certainly comes to mind here. I also wonder how we might discern the difference between instances where well-intentioned interventions are captured or coopted in implementation, and those where legislation is compromised from the outset. Not to be cynical, but I am very curious about what developers supported the Surplus Land Act. Is the kind of development that Rise Up Willowick is fighting a "detour from intent" or is it a predictable/anticipated outcome of incentivizing the auction of public land for (private) redevelopment? In other words, is the Surplus Land Act a mechanism for progressive redistribution (golf courses become affordable housing), or neoliberal privatization of public assets (city-owned green space becomes a Jamba Juice)? Such a very California question.Show lessReassigned to kimfortun@uci.eduKatie Cox Shrader10:46 AM Today@mike.fortun@uci.edu  ... Now am thinking we need to have a workflow for moving these side-bar conversations into PECE as analysis of field notes. Maybe we could be in the habit of having these conversations in the text of the document, rather than the comments?

pece_annotation_1472593232

Chris J Tang
Annotation of
In response to

"So far, however, the idea of setting up a trust fund to allow the Haitian government to eradicate cholera by providing clean water and sanitation has been a deal-killer among international donors."

"'If we do get a final order that the UN's immunity doesn't apply, we would expect the UN to put in clean water and sanitation and compensate the victims,' Concannon says [....] That's the optimistic view."

"That kind of political morass is one big reason - though by no means the only one - why the billions in relief and recovery aid haven't been enough to rescue Haiti from the disasters that fate kept flinging its way."

pece_annotation_1472924152

maryclare.crochiere
Annotation of
In response to

""USAID has spent about $1.5 billion since the earthquake,' Johnston told Goats & Soda. 'Less than a penny of every dollar goes directly to a Haitian organization.'"

This quote shows the extreme difference in total money donated compared to the money that is being used to help Haiti directly. I was mentioned that their government is hard to trust, so outside companies tend to hold the money, but that means that they can decide how they want to spend it.

"The U.N. and its agents are "absolutely immune from suit in this Court," Oetken ruled."

This quote shows the irony of the situation, by using the word "immune" it brings light to the fact that the UN's actions had major impacts on Haiti, from with the people of Haiti are very much not "immune", as cholera affects so much of the population.

pece_annotation_1472924301

maryclare.crochiere
Annotation of
In response to

There arent any references along with this document, but the author presumably researched where dontaions go, conducted interviews with the volunteers that travel to help out on the island, as well as investigating how the rebuild process is going in comparison to the state of the island before the disaster.

pece_annotation_1472924647

maryclare.crochiere
Annotation of
In response to

The main point is the lack of justice for Haiti in this rebuild process. They got huge amounts of dontions from all over the world in hopes of rebuilding the country to be better than it was. Insead, the vast majority of the money is not being spent in the right ways, and much of the spending is not being done in the most economical ways. The ways that the companies are going about rebuilding is much more wasteful than it has to be, thus using more of the money and preventing it from going as far as it could.  Additionally, the UN has created a cholera epidemic in Haiti and is not being held accountable for cleaning it up.

pece_annotation_1472925847

maryclare.crochiere
Annotation of
In response to

 Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti - Boston nonprofit - human rights

NPR - National Public Radio - news source

 President Michel Martelly - Haitian president

Nepalese soldiers - from the UN - brought Cholera

United Nations

Secretary­General Ban Ki­moon - UN

Haitian Ministries of Health and Environment

Center for Economic Policy and Research - Washington

U.S. District Court Judge J. Paul Oetken

pece_annotation_1472926325

maryclare.crochiere
Annotation of
In response to

The article dicusses how the UN has caused major health issues but is not being held accountable by the court's decision, so that is a clear injustice for Haiti. Additionally, the only money that goes directly to Haitians to spend in the recovery has been spent on helping increase children's immunizations rates and increase HIV medical treatment, so they have shown some ability to help themselves when given the resources.

pece_annotation_1473112563

harrison.leinweber
Annotation of
In response to

This article discussses why Haiti can't "build back better" after the series of disasters that have come its way. The article mentions that Haiti has become reliant upon international contractors as aid when building back because of local and international distrust of the government. This combined with the fact that many public health experts think that the UN is responsible for the cholera outbreak has caused fewer donations, and those donations that are recieved to be used less efficiently.