Racism in the urban planning process
If you have a brain you know that Richmond’s biggest problem is the race/class divide left to us by four hundred years of racism. We’ve talked about it a length. It affects every aspect of our city in deep and complex ways.
This I know.
What I don’t know is why the Richmond Free Press decided to run a front page article labeling the planning process a “Sea of Whiteness.” I also don’t know why Dover (of Dover & Kohl) actually apologized for the lack of racial diversity! WTF!
The Free Press should be apologizing.
Who better than the Free Press to motivate and inform some of the black residents of Richmond. Did the Free Press run an article alerting its readership of the meeting before labeling the event a “Sea of Whiteness?” Even if they did, did they run it on the front page in huge letters?
Sigh. It makes me angry and I can’t think straight. I may post more in the comments.
Read more here and here.
That is incredible.
— Justin | @
While I agree with much of your post, I think that Victor Dover’s acknowledgment that the downtown planning process was not as successful as it could have been is important. One of the problems with race in Richmond is that we tend to either to around the issue or throw fire on the issue; Dover basically stepped forward and said, “Yes, it wasn’t as good as it could have been. We’re working on making our future work here more inclusive. Now, let’s talk about all the cool shit we heard from the 400 people who did show up.” If we had more leaders in this town who stepped up like that, we’d be a lot further along.
— John | @
After thinking about it some I think it is mostly the city and Dover Kohl’s fault that it wasn’t more inclusive. They did just a horrible job of getting the word out about the charrette. They apparently need a PR firm(or a different one if they had one) that would get the word out in a way that gets people there. John did an amazing job getting people out… and the Richmond Free Press could have(and should have) done a much better job publicizing it, but that really isn’t their job. They should have done the PR to make this newsworthy before it happened.
— Daniel | @
how was the event advertised? i’d be surprised if this information was intentionally withheld from minority groups. perhaps, like voting, they just decided not to turn out? i don’t see why minorities didn’t know about it. anyone? sure, it would be better if groups were better represented, but you can’t force people to care and you shouldn’t apologize for them choosing not to. if that’s the case.
— Wolf | @
That was the problem… it wasn’t advertised.
— Daniel | @
apparently a ‘Sea of Whiteness’ found out about it.
— Wolf | @
I wonder if the internets talked about this event and that’s what got people out? There’s still a large, mostly minority, group that still does not have a computer with internet access in their home.
— RVAkid | @
bleh. yes, it is a class issue! people without the internets might not have heard, but this is a class issue, not a race issue. true, in richmond, the lines are too related, but to point at race/racism as the problem only increases the divide, and to point at class issues is to address the real problem. that’s the problem with the ‘free press’ article; they only looked at the shallow and superficial and didn’t dig into the heart of the matter.
— Wolf | @
I mean the two groups who showed up were people who were into the white-person civic/community scene and people who are into the blog scene, both of which groups aren’t just going to virally reach out word-of-mouth style to the black person civic/community scene unfortunately.
One thing I’d like to see them do is reach out to local churches, which would bridge the class divide a bit by reaching people who typically care about the community but don’t necessarily need a computer, regardless of race. Also, they had more people than (a) ever and (b) they planned for, given the “standing room only” situation at the original meeting on Friday night. So in their minds, they did a good if uneven job advertising, because if more people showed up, where would they even put them? Maybe the next step is a town hall meeting at a bigger location like the Landmark Theater. But if 5K people came out, is that even manageable?
— Justin | @
church advertising was suggested in the free press article also. i’m not saying they couldn’t have done a better advertising job, i’m just not sure how helpful it is to automatically throw the racist card and suggest that minorities were intentionally shut out. i guess they have people talking and things will be done better next time, so in the end, maybe some good will come of it.
— Wolf | @
[…] Haduken.com acknowledges our city’s racist history and also expresses anger at the Free Press. Several comments reveal other Richmonders’ feelings. […]
— On Racism & the Charrette « Urban Richmond! | @
absolutely right Wolf. And I do think the Free Press was wrong to push a wedge issue, especially in it’s word choice. “Sea of Whiteness”? I mean c’mon, what are the implications and the images conjured by such language? It’s inflammatory and completely unnecessary.
BTW, is this the first thing Wolf and I have ever agreed on?
I will say this though. I wish there were a public announcement for these kinds of things, say on the local evening news or something, instead of having to rely on word of mouth from church leaders and blog postings. Seems silly not to broadcast this stuff in a manner easily available to most everyone.
— RVAkid | @