Buffalo Rising Online

NOOOOOOOO! [agonized scream]

Now watch everyone blame preservationists, instead of the owners and the CIty, for not preventing this. Sort of like blaming ambulance crews for not preventing child abuse.

Freudenheim should serve a jail term.

Yes. Jail for Robert Freudenheim.

It's too bad that there isn't something equivalent to the process Children's Services had to strip parents of custodial rights. It would be great if the court could decide that people like Freudenheim are "unfit owners" and force them to sell all their property.

Didn't he also own the hotel on North street, between Delaware & Elmwood, that has come into such bad repair?

WHY is this allowed?

Its a blank two story facade...with a rotted wooden rear.

Come on Buffalo I will stand up to save a historic building with the rest but this is far from an anchor to the neighborhood and in all reality a new building might have a better facade and provide a better anchor than the present one which has been empty for decades.

You know that really nice 4-story retail/residential build on Elmwood well a 4-story rebuild would blend nicely with the brick building to the left (and what exactly is the problem with the owners of that brick building...why cant they put back the windows and retail facades on the 1st floor?)

oh and one other thing, if everyone really cared about this particular section of Allen they would open Days Park up to Allen.

In summary....Im not fighting over this building not when buildings like St Vincents and the German Roman Catholic Orphanage are at risk. Priorities have to start somewhere and trying to save this building is what gives preservationists a bad name...trying to save insignificant building.

MMMM......Didn't I see that the same Bob Freudenheim helped start a lawsuit to block the hotel at Elmwood and Forest--which is near his home??? This is: a. irony b. hipocracy c. a dual standard d. all of the above

I agree with 'L'. I think the building on the left deserves the attention. Put the windows back.

It is too late for a miracle. We are once again left 'scrambling' for a solution, a buyer or a miracle at the last minute.

Who is going to pay for the demolition? I wonder how much this demo is going to cost the taxpayers of the city? How much are we shelling out to secure this building on Mr. Freudenheim's behalf? Why doesn't the city put a lien on his other buildings to ensure that he is covering the taxes and upkeep on this property?

So many questions, and so few answers. I find the lack of accountability to be at the root of most of the issues with the City. It is the broken window theory taken to the extreme, we have looked the other way for too long on too many buildings.

This brings us back to the discussion from last week, could we identify a few of the 'must saves' that are not currently on the 'high profile, historically significant' radar? I would jump at the opportunity to invest in saving a building that is still able to be saved.

I took the photo of this building before I even knew that it was in peril. L, I know that it doesn't look like much, but when you stand in front of it you will see that there is a shell that could turn it into a real gem in the neighborhood. Click on the image and check out a larger shot. The three existing buildings work well together. A photo does not do the building justice.

Quote of the day passed along from Cynthia at Buffalo Issue Alerts:

"We've all often heard the expression, 'It's cheaper to build new than it is to reconstruct.' That's not true. I've always found that it's cheaper to use an existing structure. Now, doing so is more complicated, and you actually have to be a better builder to do that kind of work, but if you know what you're doing, it costs you less money. A lot of the building is already done--you already have your structure--so that's why it's much cheaper. For example, I saved a substantial amount of money when I built Trump Park Avenue in New York City by reusing the Delmonico Hotel's foundation, frame, and exterior."

--Donald Trump,"An Exchange with Donald Trump." Preservation, v.58, no. 4, July/August 2006, p. 18

I agree with L, I wouldn't waste time trying to save this building. There are more significant structures needing more urgent attention that could provide a bigger architectural return for the city. This is not one of them.

This is actually a very nice art deco facade--as Newell says, the photo does not begin to show any of those details. It would be nice if the facade could be saved and built on. That would be the best solution, as the bulding behind it is a goner.

This is an absolute tragedy. The owner of this building should be charged with stealing money from the taxpayers of Buffalo and the owner should be charges with endangering the life of the citizens of Buff

We need to save the insignificant buildingsaas well as the extraordinary. Buffalo has destroyed many insignificant buildings that at one time made up extraordinary neighborhoods. Today the buildings and the neighborhoods are gone forevevr. Buffalo does not need to become a sea of parking and emptiness surrounding an occasional monument.

Freudenheim is a slum lord over significant properties that deserve better. His utter disregard for anything that doesn't directly effect him is appaling. It is people like him who hide behind money/status (his wife) who get away with this. Jail is too kind...run him out to the subburbs where he belongs. I live and own in this neighborhood and even though I have not seen the full condition of this property, I am loath to have it torn down. This area not only has boomed for single family owners, but business have anchored this corner of Allentown. This is a priority for me and my neighbors because we are directly affected. I understand we cannot save them all but there have been buildings that I have written off completely that have made incredible comebacks because of private funding (St. Johns St.!). It can happen.

I liked that quote by Trump, it doesnt make sense to tear the entire structure down when parts can be reused, Hell we could burn the back part of the building and heat a part of city hall with it, the facade, is boarded but not falling apart.

It is just the american attitude to throw the whole thing away and start from scratch. But it costs money to tear down and to rebuild and money is the one thing this town is strapped for.

It is like those people who buy a new computer because theirs stopped working even though the problem might be a 5 dollar fan replacement they spend the 600 dollars on a new machine. Just seems like a wasteful practice that we do all the time and not even realize it, not just this building.

OK. Scratch my earlier comments. I'm sure the facade can be saved and who needs another empty lot. (P.S. Isn't there a Nina Freudenheim Art Gallery?)

i am going to work over there during lunch and get a better picture, but i can almost guarantee that this building is worth saving...meaning that it does not have insurmountable structural problems. if JER would like to get rid of the porperty say for $1, I would asume ownership and risk, and restore it properly.

Isn't JER the same A-holes that own approx 500 properties that are over assessed therefore they cannot recoup their investment, and let them rot? dicks.

One of the reasons no one wants to invest their money in this building is because the 4-story building next to it is the problem. Not only is the ground floor ugly as hell, but the entire building is used for public housing. All day (and night) there are people hangin' out, drinking from paper bags, parked cars on the sidewalk, loud beats bangin' from the cars, and plenty of undesirables just chillin' there. The Falcon building would not make a pleasant storefront or office space until the miriad of problems at that other building are addressed. Who in their right mind would want to be the next-door neighbor? Apparently nobody.

My question is~ Why does someone buy a building like the Falcon if they know damn well they will run it into the ground? What's the point? He also owns those beautiful stables off Richmond Avenue that are falling down. I heard he fell through the floor a year or two ago.

What are the uses of the buildings on each side of this one?

Dak,

Your criticism of the apartment building is over the top. There may well be problems associated with it, but it's not nearly as bad as you make it out to be. As for who would run a business next to it, if you look on the other side you'll find a tack shop (yes, I know why have a riding supply shop in Allentown, but that's where the owner of it wanted to have her business) that seems to be doing ok.

To add insult to injury, Robert Freudenheim also owns 35 Wadsworth right at the end of Hudson. Another property that has been vacant for years with no money invested in it. Nina (is wife? sister? someone help me out here) owns 1 Penhurst Park.

DD -Do not send him to the suburbs. We don't want him either.

Dak...do you live in the neighborhood? I only say that because I do and walk this block nearly every day and sometimes in the wee hours (heh). I never had any problems. The sidewalks are always shoveled, swepted and the people have never bothered me one bit. The people are mixed from all over the world but isn't that what makes a city great? As for the otherside, Allentown Liquor...not my first choice to shop but good in a pinch when friends show up. It's a bright busy corner and the Falcon could become any number of unique businesses. As for Freudenheim, the Buffalo News should write terrible press on HIM instead of calling the Westside "A War Zone".

Charger, My criticism of the apartment building next door is right on. I witnessed these things first hand when I lived in the apartment building just across the street at the end of Days Park. That building was very unpleasant to live near, and I can't imagine investing hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) and then having to be their next-door neighbor on one side, and a liquor store on the other. There are two storefronts further up Wadsworth just across the street from the Friends of Night People (soup kitchen) that have either been vacant, or home to failed businesses, over the years. So let's review what this location has going for it. A public housing project, a liquor store, and a soup kitchen. If location is everything, then the Falcon has a lot against it. On the other hand, it does face Days Park, and it is near a busy intersection, so who knows? I do know, however, that unless you live in extrememly close proximity to public housing or rooming houses, then you don't really know what you're talking about.

Queenseyes,

I agree that if at all possible this building should be preserved. But in fairness to L you can't compare Trump's project to this. Certainly any project team worth its salt can come up with a way to retrofit anything and keep costs down. But I suspect the reason Trump saved "a substantial amount of money" in the case of the Delmonico is the demolition costs that would have been involved. Most highrises in New York City can't use explosives and have to be taken down floor by floor.

Lived...as in past tense. Ok. I LIVE in this neighborhood and I have been bothered more by the jerks that stumble out of the bars than the people in these buildings. Besides, I don't want to live in gentrified cookie cutter neighborhood.

daveydoo,

Trump talked specifically about the parts of the building that were already in place that did not have to be built from scratch. From that I would assume that not having to demo the existing structure(that you are reusing) is additional savings on top of that.

It is a giant myth that renovation costs more than new. The only reason it may become more expensive is if you are replicating the high quality of the original versus the shoddy standards accepted in many of today's Styrofoam and plastic buildings. As always a parking lot or shovel ready site is certainly less expensive than saving a valuable piece of historic urban fabric.

Is it so unreasonable to ask that Buffalo have at least on cohesive row of 19th/20th century commercial buildings saved from the wrecker or criminal neglect?

DD, OK then you invest your money in the buidling if you think the issues concerning the neighboring buildings are without merit. There are plenty of people who would agree that its a problem. And I don't understand why you mentioned that "the people are mixed from all over the world but isn't that what makes a city great?" No one ever said that the problems in that building are related to the place the residents come from...that is unless hangin' out, chillin', drinking from paper bags and bumping big phat beats from the trunks of cars are activities that you associate with a particular group of people.

And, by the way, a gentrified neighborhood is not necessarily "cookie cutter." Case(s) in point, NYC's Greenwhich Village and to a certain extent the East Village. Both could be considered "gentrified" yet they've retained plenty of character. I hate the use of that word as if it's something inherently bad.

Just FYI, here's the definition:

gentrify

v : renovate so as to make it conform to middle-class aspirations; "gentrify a row of old houses"; "gentrify the old center of town"

I don't know about you, but I work hard to maintain my living standard, and try to make my home reflect my aspirations, middle-class, or (hopefully) slightly above middle. I don't see anything wrong with expecting your neighbors to also give a damn.

I've linked to a complete listing of all JER property in this recent post - Nailing Albany. The "social spreadheet" containing the list is a searchable website. See how many JER properties are in your neighborhood. 1500 - City wide!

So, who is paying for the demolition?

The building only looks ugly now because the original storefront and upper windows are all bricked in/boarded up. A nice glass facade along with new windows would make the little building shine again.

But all this talk of regeneration is a moot point as long as this block retains a character that is unripe for attracting significant investment. Dak rightly points out that there are too many undesirable uses on this block, which has the potential of forming an important gateway between Allentown and Symphony Circle.

As clasist as this may sound, the soup kitchen must go (it's not like the city is lacking in cheap places it could move to) and the 4-story building must be converted into better apartments before Wadsworth has any hope of being gentrified. Also some new sidewalks, trees and landscaping work is a MUST. Otherwise the block will continue to retain its "ghetto" asthetic.

A better Wadsworth would lead to renwed interest on marginal streets like Hudson.

Main Entry: genSumtriSumfiSumcaSumtion : the process of renewal and rebuilding accompanying the influx of middle-class or affluent people into deteriorating areas that often displaces earlier usually poorer residents. As per Merriam-Webster. The building houses new immigrants from South America and Africa. The music has never been offensive after 11pm and the place is alway clean. As a resident, every day I invest my time and money into my neighbors by using local shops and contributing to the KCA. The Falcon could easily become a wonderful business that taps into these reasources. Dak...maintain your living standards where ever you live, in whatever class you want to put yourself. Besides...I have been known to open my windows, crank some bad punk rock and have a cocktail on my porch. Does that make ME bad? Focus your attention on the REAL dick....Freudenheim who let this property rot for so long.

Gentrification From Wikipedia

Gentrification is a process in which low-cost, physically deteriorated neighborhoods experience physical renovation and an increase in property values, along with an influx of wealthier residents who displace the neighborhood's original inhabitants.

The results of gentrification are a source of academic and political contention. Rising property values can be a major benefit to landowners. They can also boost local tax property revenue, which can improve services for all residents. This, along with the related boost to the local economy, can improve crime rates, reduce unemployment, and clean up blighted regions. Resulting rent increases and reduced supply of low-cost rental housing can displace lower-income and working class residentsooften including members of minority groups. The extent of this displacement is often disputed, as is the offset of benefits like new jobs and expanded public services. ---------------------------------------------------------------

...I own my home, so I would not object to my property value increasing. I also like decreased crime rates. Cleaned-up blighted areas ain't half bad either. Increased tax base and reduced unemployment rates...hmm, OK, I'll take those as well.

So I have three words for you: Gentrify! Gentrify! Gentrify!

And, to answer your question--yes, in my opinion opening your window and cranking bad punk music so loud that it is troublesome to your neighbors could make you a bad neighbor...unless they have told you that they like it. (For the record, I wouldn't say that it necessarily makes you a bad person though. I like some bad punk music too.) And having cocktails on your porch is fine, unless by "having a cocktail on the porch" you mean staggering around on the sidewalk and into the street with your cocktail wrapped in a paper bag. Any chance you were ever awakened by the cops in the morning because you spent the night passed out on the pavement in front of your house?

I lived in Days Park Commons back in the day and I agree with Dak - the apartment building shown in the picture is often a problem. I don't think it's insurmountable by any means, but it's a problem nonetheless.

Gentrify you mean working on the Falcon, right? Creating viable solutions to vacant buildings. Not displacing clean, hardworking immigrants in a building that is up to code and adheres to all city ordinances. Because this article is about kicking out Freudenheim, who is a wealthy piece of crap living in a (I won't say gentrified) "well to do neighborhood" who let this property rot as well as many others. I own too and want many of the same things as you but it ain't the apartments that have let this corner slide. Blight is the Falcon, not the apartments. If Freudenheim had done what he could have with the money he has...who is not to say that maybe he would have started a movement to revitalize the area and brought in more interest for businesses years ago! Then again...I probably couldn't have gotten my house so cheap. Heh.

I live pretty close by too. While I wouldn't say the public housing and the soup kitchen are problem free, people have to live somewhere, and so far I don't think it's prevented investment -- witness a lot of recent developments chronicled in BRO, like the house on St John's that's being rennovated, or all the things happening around Plymouth Ave. (also, isn't another wine bar going in next to the liquor store?) Things are looking somewhat spiffy here west of Wadsworth. One of the great charms of Allentown, the Klienhans area and the lower West side is its mix of backgrounds, and I really think I'd like it less here if it was more homogenous.

Steel,

Please don't misunderstand: If a white night preservation-minded developer came on the scene next week I think it would be many times better than the alternative. The problem I had with the quote that Queenseyes gave was the differences in the scales of the Delmonico versus this property. Trump has incentive to preserve as much as possible because of the magnitude of tearing it all down. The same can't be said (unfortunately) with this property. Perhaps if it's broken down on a square footage basis they could be compared. Again I absolutely agree that a good project team can make preservation work at less cost than complete demolition.

While I wouldn't say the public housing and the soup kitchen are problem free, people have to live somewhere,

There is no shortage of low-income housing in Buffalo--the "oh noes, the poor people are gonna be displaced" argument doesn't really hold much water here. Yes, in an uber-gentrified city like NYC or SF, this is true, but certainly not in Buffalo.

Still reading comments but I must take issue with one thing. Open Days Park up to Allen?!?!?! Just because Cars can't cross between the two, doesn't mean it's not open. I walk or Bike through that exact spot frequently, trust me, it's open, and well used. I actually love the fact that cars do not have free reign in this neighborhood, and I'm sure the neighbors of Days Park don't want the traffic congestion from Allen creeping into their residential paradise. No offense, this is no personal attack and I mention no names, but 'opening' Days Park to Allen is an ill-conceived idea.

Look folks, Buffalo has a limited amount of money to save buildings with, and wasting it on preserving that unassuming eyesore is just going to mean less money to save more worthy buildings. I say let it go, the building is falling apart and is not about to be anyone's choice of empty buildings to start a business or whatever else the some idealists out of touch with reality might think can be done with it.

I didn't mean that Buffalo has a shortage of low-income housing. Sometimes redeveloping public housing -- into a mixed-income community, for example -- can be a good thing. (or ripping it down if it's falling down and mostly empty) But by sweeping people out of one place, you're creating a concentration of poor people somewhere else, and that's not good for anyone in the city. For people who think the soup kitchen and public housing should be somehow removed from Allentown: if that were possible, and you were in charge, where would be an appropriate place to put it where it wasn't 'hampering progress' (or whatever)?

Gentrification can be a good thing. I'd just prefer to see economic integration rather than complete displacement (if I ran things)o and I think that's what we are seeing on some city streets west of Richmond and Wadsworth. And I think Allentown and areas west will continue to see more and more investment, because they have a lot to offer with or despite Friends of the Night People.

Or to be more succinct, sometimes displacement is inevitable, but that doesn't mean it's necessary.

MBBA/JER has held properties hostage for several years especially on the East Side of Buffalo, The City of Buffalo was penny wise and pound foolish on that deal! Its a crying shame that this building will likely need demolition because a slumlord left it sitting for years and so did Pataki But also If this was on a different street in a different area would there be such an outcry?

The level of poverty in Buffalo is absolutely suffocating. Its enought to make even the most hopeful reach a point of pessimism and despair.

Go to the Klienhans Community Association and look at the really great houses that need an owner in order to save them from demolition and this is an area of Buffalo that has been slowly gentrifying for the last 20-30 years (for many beginning with the saving of the Birge Mansion).

This is what I mean about prioritizing. When we attempt to save everything....we dilute if not loose all those we have convinced to champion our cause.

Better to have this building than not have it but it can be replaced just as easily. Its not the facades on Genesee nor is it St Vincents Orphanage nor is it the equivalent of the Brick building to the left. Its nice but have you driven around and seen some of the incredible buildings that need saving. There is only so much time, money and goodwill....where do we really want to spend it.

Look at the buildings that have come off the list and add to that we are even managing to save our grain silos but lets remember that large segments of Buffalo are still in danger that have valuable historial and community significance. That is why we need a list so we dont chase our tail with every building but focus our resources and good will on those that arent worthy or significant.

Lastly, there are always compromises and alternatives. The rear of the building could easily be demolished and the facade saved then re-incorporated whenever a new building permit is issued.

The level of poverty in Buffalo is absolutely suffocating. Its enough to make even the most hopeful reach a point of pessimism and despair.

Try Mexico City, D.F., L.

get a grip! we have poverty, true. Alleviating it is good, no duh. But there are many many places far worse off. Your hyperbole doesn't contribute meaningfully.

The asshat that "owns" that building is also involved in preventing the hotel from being built on Forest & Elmwood. So, don't reward him by paying for his demo; send him to jail and let's find someone with the balls to use the facade... the gap that will be there won't be filled any faster than the facade is used, I imagine.

Why not post the home address and pictures of the owners of these neglected properties on the web web?

I wish I knew the faces associated with these names. I would love to have a few words with the EV hotel litigation lady. Furthermore, I also would love to have my German Shepard take a nice dump on their property during one of our nightly walks.

I pass by this location several times everyday. I usually see it in the mid afternoon and very late at night often after midnight. Surely there are some issues with the apartment building but they are not as severe or as consistent as some of the posters say. Also, a friend use to live a short distance down the street and he said he has never had a problem with anyone in the area.

I do believe that this is a very marketable area deep in the inners of Allentown. Surely it's diverse but that's one element adding to the atmosphere and character of this area.

Looking closely at the facade of this building today, it seems to be in not bad shape. I have no idea what the structual condition might be of the rest of the building. Restoring the building or rebuilding new in keeping with the Allentown historic district could spark some new life in this part of Allentown. It's really not at all a bad location. Both Hardware and Joey's Hardtimes Cafe just a short distance away seems to be thriving. Both are relatively new ventures. More thriving just down the street could easily happen.

Dear Use it or Loose it, I agree with you there are places worse off..it was a metaphor for Buffalonians having limited resources and that there are more valuable buildings to focus those limited resources.

And I said...that the facade should be kept until a new owner of the property submits a new building for the site then it can be decided whether to incorporate it or replace it. Keep the facade and save the fight for a later date.

and I would support the county doing a search for property owners and if there are back taxes or demolition fees then there should be a lien against all their properties. I think thats very supportable. Write your county legislators!

There was a lot of discussion on Buffalo Issues Alerts (yahoo group) about 'shaming' delinquent property owners. Why couldn't we start here? The Freudenheims are relatively well known in Buffalo, their aol email is available with the most basic web search, if we want to do something about the building, why not contact the owner directly, instead of promoting wishful thinking that someone will come in and buy it from him? Why should he benefit for his neglect? Put pressure directly where pressure is needed, at the source of the neglect. This is a relatively artsy crowd, why not avoid Nina's North Street art gallery as a protest for her role in the architectural decay of the city? She and her husband are profiting from the neglect of their properties (they are not paying for upkeep and are behind on taxes) make it known that this behaviour will not be tolerated.

I had actually looked at this property for a while and had a strong interest in acquiring it. I saw the clear opportunity to potentially pick up the building cheap due to it's foreclosure and then be able to keep the facade and build new behind. However upon further investigation there were two limiting factor to anyone who has any semblance of a budget or looking for a positive return on their investment (and sucessfull positive imact on the neighborhood).

1. Due to being held by MBBA and all the tax liens on the property, the acquisition would be long, costly and difficult. Even if the property went for a low price.

2. Due to the collapsed structure behind the facade there would need to be 2 big steps to remediate and stabilze. The first would to be simultaneously demolish the rear portion of the building while re-supporting the front facade. This would be extremely costly and dangerous due to the fact that it is almost impossible to get the proper equipment and clearances (physically due to the site being "land-locked" on all 3 sides) for this phase.

3. If the facade was properly stabilized then work pertaining to new construction would also prove difficult. Access to the majority of the site behind the original facade would have to either be via crane over the facade or (for smaller items) through an enlargend opening in the facade. Either way this would call for special permits to occupy a signifcant ammount of space near or on the intersection of Allen and Wadsworth.... which I am sure would create problems in its own.

4. The rear wood-framed structure behind the facade. CANNOT be saved... it has completely collapsed in into the basement.... ie, all the floors have become and inverted V. I am supprised that the facade is still standing.

So to all who have an interest in "saving" this building. Good luck, and I hope you have alot of patience and an very large checkbook. It does pose a wonderfull opportunity for in-fill development and the neighboorhood is happening and ripe for it.

This building is a blighted piece of trash. Get rid of it and let one of the local groups take over the land. A garden, a little park, anything else would be better in this area.

Only by getting rid of its trash will Buffalo be able to survive. After 100 years of population drops, it's time for this city to realize that most of these old buildings are not charming, not pretty, and not historically-interesting. They're just trash.

Keep the facade. Ridiculous! You want taxpayers to pay for a facade when there are so many other needs in this city?! Absurd.

Re: gentrification - don't forget that when property values increase along with the tax base, your own taxes will rise concurrently. It's a double-edged sword - unless you plan to sell as soon as it's profitable, which would it would only be if you have a net profit after subtracting the amount of tax increase. But if you plan to hold on to the property, it could be a different story. Even though you'll have more equity for borrowing purposes, you still have to consider interest on equity loans along with the increased tax amount, thus cutting into your eventual profits at such a time as the property is sold. Also, property buyers are encouraged to base a purchasing decision in part on current tax rates, to cushion against the possibility of foreclosure due to non-payment of taxes. That means property owners budget based on current tax rates, not future unknowns (though commonly-given advice is to set aside some extra cash just in case taxes go up, and even then, property owners must decide how much to set aside based on predicted trends - and all guesses could be wrong). For most people, The American Dream of Homeownership means a place of stability. The Invester's Dream of Homeownership means turnovers as rapid as the market allows. They are two incompatible interests. The American Dream can only be maintained as long as people can afford to pay their taxes.

One last note: Jenny's endorsement of mixed income neighborhoods is, I think, more desireable than chasing those who can't afford the increases out of the neighborhood. The robotic assumption is that displacing the impoverished out of gentrifying areas is necessary to reduce crime. While there is an overall correlation between poverty level and crime rates, it is not a universal given that all poor people will commit crimes. Many poor people - especially (traditionally) the newest immigrants - seek to rear their children in low-crime areas, and work to make a better life for their heirs. These types of mixed income neighborhoods increase prosperity and decrease crime for all.

On the other hand, if you insist on a means-based system of determining who stays & who goes - that is, based on who can afford the highest expenditures - then the net effect is to force all poorer people into ghettos, regardless of their aspirations. This gives the children of immigrants a model of America emphasizing the necessity to engage in crime as a means of survival. If they don't see the other side of America, you can't expect them to "just know" how to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

No matter how self-sufficient you think you are, the fact is, you are where you are because a lot of people lifted you up.