Yesterday's post questioning the expanded mission of a popular local charity drew only one reaction from a indignant reader, I thought there would be more. Alfonso Todd, local activist, actually complimented the concept of applying diligence to our giving. About twenty years ago I formally opposed a Habitat For Humanity Project. Their plan for three new houses would have blocked the side window in a property I managed, denying my dwelling both light and air. Habitat's plan was endorsed by the City, The Redevelopment Authority and defended by the city solicitor. After the hearing, at which I prevailed, Habitats Regional Director came up to apologize to me. Seems they went with their standard straight wall plan to save time and money, even though everyone knew blocking a neighbors window was improper. He told me they were such a sacred cow that nobody had ever opposed them before.
Same guy from yesterday here - I agree w/ you on this point, there should never be Sacred Cows, nothing productive comes out of blind loyalty or support.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually surprised as well that I was the only one(besides Bernie O'Hare) that responded.
Yesterday's was a passionate topic for me for many reasons; I apologize for going over the line. Still stand by by my support for the ARM though!
What a nice person Anon 9:29 must be! It's very rare for any of us to admit the slightest error, and it is so refreshing for someone to admit his/her passion got to him/her. I wish you were not anonymous so I could compliment you by name.
ReplyDeleteMichael is a good guy with unusual and sometimes unpopular views. I agree with you, and not my friend Michael, about ARM. Michael may have been right about Habitat for Humanity some hundreds of years ago, but he's pretty much wrong about everything else. He's even friendly with a disreputable Nazareth blogger. There's no accounting for his poor taste.
Thanks Bernie, appreciate it! At some point I won't be Anon, but please understand for now I need to be.
ReplyDelete