Councilman Clarke and "affordable housing" - PhillyBlog

LovephillyHard · #1 (**permalink**) 02-17-2006, 10:00 AM

Do you know that the five "L" in Councilman Darryll L. Clarke stands for "Liar, Liar, Liar, Liar, Liar"

Clarke is in a heat of battle with AABRA and he has unleashed his whole army, including RDA and others within his disposal to do his dirty tricks. Remember, when Clarke, says he's got juice, he meant it. As if the AABRA story was not painful enough, read this Daily News story http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/13606389.htm about how Councilman Darryl Liar Clarke duped Reverend John Wallace.

The gist of the story was that Clarke encouraged pawning a property to a developer as charitable contribution, he then conveniently have the property renovated for him at a cost of $167k. Because Clarke decided to buy the property before renovation started, he was able to make specific requests on the renovation, from paint color and carpeting to cabinetry and other features. Kessington South, the developer, actually said that when all the soft costs are tallied, the house actually cost far more than the $167k Councilman Clarke paid for his new home at 115 Jefferson Street (don't forget to order pizza).

In today's hot real estate market, one would have to wonder what will motivate a property owner to donate their property as Charitable Contribution, or a developer to sell his property at a substantial loss? Isn’t this a form of PAY-TO-PLAY? Meanwhile, Clarke says that from a "public-policy perspective" he favors the Kensington South proposal because it calls for an affordable-housing component, unlike the 413 Hope Mission proposal. "That's my thing. I'm always pushing for affordable housing," Clarke said.

Also is it coincidental that AFTER City Councilman Darrell Clarke bought the renovated rowhouse from Kessington South, he introduced a bill to condemn Rev. John Wallace’s project for Kessington South (just when Kessington South successfully delivered the renovated charitable rowhouse back to Clarke)? Clarke sees no conflict of interest and cited a city solicitor's opinion that supported his moves. When asked why he had not disclosed his home purchase at the time of the condemnation hearing, Clarke said, "I don't think that one had anything to do with the other. It was a private purchase with no city money. What did that have to do with anything?" Duh, Mr. Clarke, the purchase has city money – you pimped-it-up as charitable contribution, which ultimately benefits you. That is the conflict of interest.

Clarke is PIMPING affordable housing by divvying out the largess of NTI to developers as charitable contributions, then have the properties renovated for his and his cohorts' ownership (e.g. the City Solicitor who sees no conflicts in Clarke’s actions). This is now a common place in Philadelphia City government. Let’s face it; this is “pimping at the highest level, another form of “pay-to-play”. Honest, well meaning developers are prone to loose out on bids because City officials swindle deals for their own personal gains.

Voters should be outraged and not be fooled with Clarke’s constant assertions in the press that he is holding unto public properties in his district until he can find developers that are willing to include affordable housing in their development mix. This is nothing short of PIMPING-AT-THE-HIGHEST- LEVEL. Clarke is using his ENOURMOUS powers to pimp public properties and the public trust on the back of innocent poor people under the guise of “affordable housing”. Now that voters understand Clarke’s “brand” of the term, “affordable housing”, nothing get’s done without being pimped.

Moreover, it is not that Clarke can’t find developers, the fact is he is too busy looking for corrupt ones, and where there is a shortage (not that there is) he develops his own JUICY posse (remember he’s got juice) by moonlighting for them.

How many more of Clarke’s juicy friends owned some of these luxurious "affordable housing”? To add insult to injury, Clarke said that he has a right to buy a home from whomever he wishes that this purchase had nothing to do with his official duties and that he scrupulously made sure there was no public subsidy involved. Did he say SCRUPULOUSLY? Well, if Clarke doesn’t understand that charitable contribution of public property to any developer, for his own (Clarke’s) personal gain, is considered public subsidy, what does he understand?

Voters should be outraged. Everyone involved in the unscrupulous divvying out of the largess of NTI are guilty as charged - the City Solicitor, RDA, NTI, OHCD, the City Council members, Council President and the Mayor's office. Let the record show that, in 2006 Philadelphia has a sitting City Councilman that earn a $100k a year salary and owned a brand new “affordable housing” – by way of charitable contribution.

Let’s not forget the general voters feeling in the 5th District, Clarke is hurting multitudes of voters in his district. We asked that you forward this Daily News Story to others on your distribution list, so that they are encouraged to share their own experience living in the 5th District.

Who is running against Clarke, in 2007? Let’s vote out corrupt politicians. Today’s City Council members are too lazy to work and too busy to swindle; Clarke is no exception. Voters must demand more ethics rules in 2007.

Bring out the gauntlet! In 2007, vote out corrupt politicians!! Vote out Darryl JUICE!!!

Don't just Love Philly - LOVE PHILLY HARD, vote out corrupt politicians in 2007.