Theory vs Practice

Vacant prop
Originally uploaded by In Shaw

Sorry for not posting for a while. My 93 year old grandma passed last week away so we were all busy with that. Anyway back to your regularly scheduled blogging…..
I think it was Kwame Brown, who threw out the suggestion at a BACA mtg that DC should take over distressed properties. And this morning on the radio some NoVA county governments are tossing around the idea of taking over foreclosures. May I suggest don’t do it. Well for DC don’t do it until you can clean up and move the properties you currently own, like schools (cough *Langston* cough) and residential buildings.
In theory government has the ability and power to make homes livable again. In practice, or at least what I’ve noticed around here, is that theory doesn’t work out as well as hoped. There are several properties that DC had, then transferred over to Manna, La Casa and other non-profits with experience in rehabs, that later became livable homes. There are also a bunch of properties that have remained painfully vacant and dilapidated for years if not decades in the hands of DC government or inept non-profits that DC land was transferred to.

4 thoughts on “Theory vs Practice”

  1. Mi Casa 🙂 Agree with this, DC is SO bad with taking care of its own dumps. They promised the Bundy School renovation for Safe Shores years ago, but we still have boards on the broken windows. There is the (1200 block) 4th street project weve been waiting about 3 years for…another “house” on N they are just sitting on with no plans. just a few things that come to mind. The inertia is inexplicable and serves no purpose. And we get to live with it.

    Sorry about your grandma.

  2. condolences on your loss.

    Safe Shores is a crime magnet..thanks bill lightfoot.


  3. 1. Yes, condolences.

    2. I testified about the need for receivership for nuisance properties pretty regularly between 2002 and 2005.

    But I advocated for this power to be used in very specific ways.

    And I said judging by past behavior, that the District Government, by any objective judge, would be deemed not fit to participate in such a program. Same for most CDCs. (And would be true for churches too.)

    This post, from 2005, includes the base testimony:

Comments are closed.