West Seattle Reign of Fashion Showers Audience with Creativity

Reign of Fashion WallFashion Flyers

The creativity and passion of youth was on full display at the August 21st Unified Outreach Fashion Expose’ in West Seattle.

Kiel backOn stage were 20 aspiring models broken into two groups; the Little Royals were first-year models ages 5-10; followed by the Reign of Fashion models who ranged from 13-18 years old.  For many this was the first time they had ever walked a runway; but designer Carlisia Minnis from MAC Fashion House spent time with the models during the weeks leading up to the show to be sure that they were comfortable strutting their stuff on the catwalk.Karla stage

Behind the scenes were youth from the Unified Outreach program which consisted of teams of youth ages 13-18 who planned, designed, and delivered the 1 hour program. These teams consisted of Facilities/Stage Set-Up/Sound & Lighting, Promotions/PR/Marketing, Photo & Video Production, and Stage Management/Models/Runway.

David Toledo, one of the event organizers said, “The entire behind the scenes crew was made up of teens from 13 to 18 years old from the work training in the arts program. It can be hard to grasp the magnitude of what these kids were able to produce; especially when you consider that many had no experience of this sort just 4 weeks ago.  But tonight they did the sound and lighting, facilities, photo and video, stage set up, and everything else to deliver this flawless event.”4Culture Red Carpet Unified Outreach

Credit was also given to the program instructors April Goode, Edward Dumas, and Isis West-Goode; as well as the SYVPI counselors Nani, Lensy, Merry, and J’Quai who provided additional support to the kids during the 4 weeks of classes.

In the audience was a mixture of both local and national personalities, sports stars, political figures, media personalities, major advertising agencies, and merchandizing and department store buyers; provided the youth an excellent opportunity to network with industry leaders and local heroes who were available for the meet & greet following the show.

The annual event is made possible with a financial grant from the Office of Arts & Culture, a technology grant from 4Culture, and a facility usage grant from West Seattle Christian Church.  Once all of the funding is in place Unified Outreach partners with the staff at SYVPI and SW Family Services to recruit youth ages 13-18 to participate in the program.

The work-readiness-in-arts partnership was created during the Mike McGinn mayoral era;  a result of Unified Outreach members engaging Mayor McGinn at art-related town halls.  Unified Outreach presented the idea that the City wasn’t doing enough by simply funding arts classes; but that kids need networking opportunities, as well as education and career tracks once the art class/workshop has ended.  Mayor McGinn was receptive and in 2011 the City launched the work-readiness grant program.

TKG Dance CrewAnd on Sunday, August 21, 2016 the Unified Outreach non-profit youth arts Charity took work-readiness programs to a whole other level with a custom designer fashion show that would put some industry-level entertainment companies to shame. The event was hosted by local celebrity Sammy Tekle, with music performances by Ali Rahimi, dance routine by TGK Dance Crew, and featuring a fully catered dinner by Goode Girls.

In addition to the custom design outfits by MAC Fashion House; this year Unified Outreach also welcomed Lu LaRoe who provided the outfits for the Little Royals.Runway walk

The Unified Outreach Work-Training in the Arts program returns in 2017. Visit http://www.UnifiedOutreach.com for details.

IMG_0999

The buffet and desert selection was provided free by Goode Girls Catering.

The event was held a the WSCC Exhibition Hall at 4400 42nd Ave SW.

 

For further information please visit www.UnifiedOutreach.com, email UnifiedOutreach@hotmail.com, or call 206-371-1139.

 

COMMUNITY POSTINGS WARN OF DANGER; ASK MAYOR FOR EQUAL REPRESENTATION

  WN CD

October 3, 2015, Saturday evening drivers entering Seattle’s CD and Rainer Valley were greeted with hundreds of warning posters alerting them to dangers in Seattle’s Central District and South End of town.  The large red print on a black background shouts “Warning!  Entering the Central District!” and “Warning!  Entering Rainier Valley!”

While on the other side of the posters; drivers leaving these areas were greeted with a bright and colorful sign reading “Welcome! Now exiting the Central District/Rainier Valley!”

WLC CD

Members of Equal Representation Now say that the problem of youth on youth violence in the area is being overlooked by city officials and are asking for equal representation in regards to city policy.

In the summer of 2014 neighborhoods in these areas saw an unprecedented rise in youth on youth violence and murders, with almost daily reports of gun fire and nearly 20 youths murdered at the hand of other children.  Summer 2015 we saw the continuation of this violence with multiple murders, and much like the previous summer most going unnoticed by local media.

The organizers of tonight’s event note that in other areas of the city our leaders react differently to violence and threats of violence.  “On Capitol Hill the reaction to threats of violence was to put together a task force, engage LGBTQ leaders, and even go as far as to paint crosswalks to show solidarity and that (the threat of) violence would not be tolerated.”  We applaud the City’s quick action in this case of the verbal threats and harassment on Capitol Hill. However, the African-American community in Seattle is actually losing lives; and we are being told that the find-it-fix-it campaign is enough.”

The East African community in Seattle has community leaders that represent themselves and hold advisory positions in the Mayor’s office.  The LGBTQ community has leaders from the LQBTQ community that hold advisory positions in the Mayor’s office.  Yet when it comes to the African-American community we are told that adult AA males who were born and raised in these very neighborhoods are not best suited to advise on African-American youth in the area.

In 2014 the Mayors Office was presented with a proposal for the creation of an Office of Inner-City Affairs to help address the problem of youth violence Seattle’s CD and Rainer Valley.  The proposal was rejected as City Hall felt that there were adequate programs in place to address the issues; despite the evidence that youth-on-youth violence was escalating.IMG_20151003_185739

Organizers of tonight’s event hope that this display will be the catalyst to start people asking why there is not equal representation of communities in the Mayor’s Cabinet; and that maybe the Mayor will take another look at the previous proposal.

“We posted these signs because people need to know what they are driving into.  These neighborhoods are not safe.  There is a much greater chance of being shot and killed in this area than in any other part of Seattle.  Especially if you are a young, African-American male.”

“There are a lot of things that City Hall deals with on a daily basis; but few are truly a matter of life and death. When we see true leadership in the area from grassroots community groups such as Rose Prayer Ministries, B.U.I.L.D., and others it gives us hope.  But these voices need to have the Mayors ear!“

Reaction to the signage has been mixed, with mostly positive support for addressing the issue of youth violence and the loss of life in the African-American community.  However, there are some who disapprove of the message and have started their own campaign of removing the posters.

-JP Scratches

The Affordable Housing Conversation Everyone Can Understand

By David Toledo

THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUZZ. UNDERSTANDING WHAT EVERYONE IS TALKING ABOUT.

Seattle loves our buzz-words and bumper sticker slogans; and who can’t get behind something like “Affordable Housing, Now!” Especially when the annual night-out homeless count found 2,813 people sleeping on the Seattle streets (and another 1,000 on the outskirts of town).

But ask the average person on the street to define affordable housing and you might be surprised with the answer (or lack of).  Terms like affordable housing, rental subsidies, transitional housing, shelters, Section-8, and low income housing all run together in a hodge-podge of confusing buzz words and political jargon.

If we want to solve these problems we need to all start speaking the same language.

The first step in addressing the very different, yet sometimes linked problems of affordable housing and homelessness will lie in our ability to clearly communicate what we see as the genesis of each problem.  Once we are clear with what problems we are trying to correct we can begin identifying existing programs along with their strengths and weaknesses.  We need to communicate in clear, easy to understand terms what at the challenges and what is the goal as we move forward in address our housing problems.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING:

The term affordable housing is connected to median income.  Once the median income for an area is established then rentals over 30% of a renter’s income is considered cost burdened or unaffordable.  So what is median income?  Median income is the middle point of a climbing income chart.  At one end you have zero income, the other end you have the highest earner in the given area.  All earners are put on a chart from lowest to highest in chronological order.  Then, the chart is split right down the middle and that point is the median, the exact center of the chart.  Median is not the average income of an area, nor is it a bell-curve (majority income).  Here’s an example- if the market consists of only 9 people, with the first 3 all making $3 each, then all others earning income that climbs in $5 increments, the median in this case would be $13 (the middle point), and 30% of that would be $3.90 (affordable housing).  Now, if all landlords in the area rented at that rate, it would make it very hard for tenants at the lower end of the spectrum to find housing; which is what has been the topic of discussion for those advocating for “affordable” housing.

Median Income Sample

The confusion comes when using the term “affordable” housing in broad terms. In markets with heavy ends of the spectrum landlords who may in fact be pricing their units at 30% of median income may appear to be price gouging when that is not always the case.  Median income for a 2-person household in Seattle for 2014 is approximately 64K.  So a 1-bedroom apartment priced at $1600.00 is considered affordable housing by HUD standards, even though this rate would not be considered affordable by someone living in the lower end of the chart.

We need a clear distinction between advocating for rent control, subsidized housing, or homeless shelters and services.  All are important discussions and deserve to receive consideration from our city leaders and community stakeholders.

If we are talking about rent controlled areas then we must be clear that rent control legislation is what we are seeking.  However, as RCW 35.21.830 currently prohibits rent control in Seattle we need to look at other ways to provide relief to renters.

If we are talking about increased subsidy programs we need to look at the pros and cons of existing subsidized housing in Seattle to see how to best develop any new funding programs.

SUBSIDIZING TENT CITIES AND SHELTERS:

Currently the City is looking at providing 50 new shelter beds and proposing a bill to allow three tent encampments in the city.  Funding of new and expanding shelters and tenant cities must be a priority for our legislators.  If Seattle moves forward with linkage fees on new construction this should be one of the areas that we use the collected revenue.

As these programs are expanded we must understand that there is no one-size-fits-all regarding our shelter system.  Many seniors won’t stay in a shelter because they fear the youth violence, whereas some veterans won’t take a bed that could go to someone else because they are still holding to their idea of honor and service to their fellow man.  We need to look at targeted funding/special programs for our seniors and our veterans, as well as growing our teen, single mothers, and family shelters.

The proposed 3 tent cities modeled after the Nickelsville camp can provide community structure that is much safer than the streets would be for a family trying to survive on their own. However, the city still needs to develop a structure for how to best partner with these programs, and provide access to essential services such as one-stop help complexes to give access to city services and help with personal economic recovery.  Additionally, some activists are working towards establishing tent-cities in residential areas; whereas currently they are limited to mixed use and commercial zones. The concern that tent cities may permanently change the personality of a given neighborhood is something that city leaders must consider when engaging this issue. We must resist the urge to fix-it-quick and instead find a long-term solution that meets the needs of those facing homelessness while still respecting the property rights of our neighbors.

HOUSING SUBSIDIES:

Voucher Programs:  Voucher programs are generally HUD funded programs that involve HUD paying a portion of said rent.  The “Section 8/Housing Choice Voucher” program is a voucher that is given to a tenant to use at ANY rental property that falls within the voucher limits (a 1-bedroom voucher is $879).

The Section 8 voucher holder is considered a “protected class” in Seattle which means landlords cannot discriminate or refuse tenancy just because they don’t want the Section-8 check.  It has become increasingly harder to use Section 8 vouchers in the Seattle area because of the recent rise in rental amounts, but the voucher is still valued for its portability.

The second type of voucher is called “Project Based” which ties the subsidy to the apartment itself.  The Project Based program partners with a given apartment building (these apartment owners are community partners working directly with HUD or with a Housing Authority).  This means the tenant pays a reduced rent on the apartment.  If the subsidized tenant decides to move from the apartment they lose the assistance and the next person moving into that apartment gets the subsidy.  As long as the voucher holder stays under 80% of median income they will receive some portion of assistance.  If the tenant income surpasses that 80% of median income the tenant loses their voucher.  However, in both cases the vouchers are also transferable between household members, and can be given to other family members or even friends as long as they are listed in the household.  The vouchers are transferred by promoting a current household member to Head of Household prior to the original voucher holding tenant moving out.  Some subsidy vouchers have been known to be handed down through several generations.

It is not uncommon for developers to receive tax-breaks in exchange for a low-income annex to new construction. Contracts usually stipulate that a portion of the new rental space be subsidized for an average of 40-years before moving to market rate.

LIPH:  Another type of subsidy is Low Income Public Housing (LIPH).  This is housing which is usually owned and operated by the government or a non-profit, although some public housing projects are managed by subcontracted private agencies.  Seattle Housing Authority owns some 600 properties in Seattle including single resident homes, duplexes, high rise buildings, and major housing properties such as Yesler Terrace, High Point, Rainier Vista, and New Holly.

Seattle Housing Authority provides subsidy assistance to over 28,000 people in the Seattle area alone each year.  This includes over 5,300 Low Income Public Housing (LIPH) units in major apartment complexes, 1,600 town homes, duplexes, single family units, and another 8,500 Section-8 vouchers.  King County Housing assists another 7,800 apartments and 11,000 Section-8 vouchers, and smaller programs house thousands more in the Greater Seattle area.

Although some programs such as Senior Housing have a minimum income requirement with rent portion based on a step-program, the majority of LIPH programs do not have such a requirement and ask only a $50 monthly payment for tenants with very low or zero income.  This is where the biggest drain is on the Housing Authority’s budget and something we will look at in the next section.

SAVING THE SUBSIDIZED HOUSING WE ALREADY HAVE

In 2014 Seattle Housing Authority presented their Step Forward Proposal.  Under the proposal current households with “work-able” tenants would be required to move to a step increase rental program.  Unfortunately the program met with fierce resistance and was shelved, possible permanently.  But I would like to examine the proposal as well as the circumstances that led to its inception.

Their proposal simply put operated like this:  LIPH households that had someone “work-able” between the ages of 24 and 61 and who does not have a disability would move to a step-rental program.  Let’s look at a 1-bedroom example of how the program would work: A family in a one-bedroom apartment would pay $140 monthly rent for the first year (four bedroom homes start at $180), rent increased the second year to $340, and so on until it peaked at $720 in the 7th year.  The program is easily affordable for even someone working part-time at minimum wage and is in-step with the increased minimum wage law that is currently being applied in Seattle.

Some Seattle City Council members not only refused to engage in discussion of the proposal, but actively encouraged the disruption of town hall meetings that were designed to foster dialogue between the Housing Authority and its tenants.

But what events inspired the proposal in the first place?

In 2011-2012 Seattle Housing lost 11% of its annual budget when HUD announced that it was cutting funding to Seattle Housing Authority.  This resulted in massive staffing cuts, but left the tenant subsidies untouched.  In other words, Seattle Housing Authority did everything they could in order to keep the tenant programs running as they had always been.

Now, imagine you are the property owner of one of the 4-bedroom homes that SHA owns. The renters are a zero income family paying the standard $50 minimum rental bill each month.  This year the roof starts leaking, and someone kicks a hole in the wall, the window gets broken, and the refrigerator needs replacing.  Plumbing issues, electrical issues, bedbugs, vandalism, and more.  How do you cover the costs of these types of repairs when you’ve only brought in a total of $600 in rent for the entire year?  Even the best of tenants will require maintenance now and again; and SHA pays union wages, so the repair job is always quality; but the bills aren’t cheap.

But the biggest source of destruction in many zero-income homes is mold.  One of the biggest problems facing a zero-income family is how to pay for electricity.  If a family cannot pay their electric bill or intentionally keeps their heat turned off to save money, the result is often mold.  Mold can destroy insulation, fixtures, interior and exterior walls, and more.

So we have to ask ourselves is the current model sustainable?  Can Seattle Housing continue to meet the needs of current and future residents with funding being cut and with a City Council that fails to act as an honest broker between the Housing Authority and Tenant Advocates?

I’m not here to debate the merits of the Step Forward proposal.  But I will ask if you had previously heard any of the information I just presented? In order to solve our housing problems voters and advocates need to be presented with all the facts and we need city leaders that are able to examine all ideas without giving in to their own hubris and political grandstanding.  Don’t like the proposal? Have concerns with certain areas and need more information on exemptions?  Bring them to the table and let’s talk about them.  I understand and agree that nothing should be rubber stamped.  We see the results of failed due diligence in the matter of the tunnel fiasco and we want city leadership that asks questions and is engaged.  We need city leaders that encourage honest conversations and debates in an effort to find positive solutions to our housing problems.  However, what we’ve seen instead is a city council that encourages shouting down opponents and the obfuscation of facts, and that is doing our city a great disservice.  We must be careful about our focus on what other programs the city should fund or expand even as the largest housing program in our region is sinking beneath us.

EXPANDING SUBSIDIZED HOUSING IN THE SEATTLE AREA

There have been a number of proposals for expanding subsidized housing in the Seattle area.  Ideas range new construction “linkage fees” assigned to contractors and used to fund smaller low-income housing programs.  Others have suggested more flexibility with micro-housing and congregate housing standards, encouraging the building of apartments that trade the comfort of spacious living for a lower rental costs.

However, we as a city also need to look at external forces that hinder low-income housing from being successful.  We talked earlier about the issue of mold being rampant in low-income housing units; causing structural damage as well as health issues for tenants.  This problem is often overlooked by those that advocate for free homes/housing for the homeless.  Although their hearts are in the right place, it is almost certain that any shelter in the northwest will fall into disarray if the person being housed is unable to keep the electricity on.

Educational opportunity, work training programs, economic growth, and addressing Seattle’s perilous relationship with one of the country’s most regressive tax systems are all steps our city leaders must take if we are to ever see a decrease in our need for emergency shelter and subsidized housing services.

For those of us that advocate for our brothers and sisters that are at-risk of losing housing, or that are already living in transitional housing, shelters, tent-cities, or on the street; we must be clear in our message.  We must not be afraid to discuss ideas and we must never let “perfect” be the enemy of “good”.  We can overcome even the most mountainous of problems one step at a time; unified, armed with knowledge and a willingness to hear all ideas.

 

David Toledo Seattle City Affordable Housing Advocate
David Toledo is the Director of Unified Outreach Seattle, a 501c3 established 1998.

 

 

 

BRING THE NOISE! Legendary Seattle artist David Toledo makes the leap from street art to political activism.

Originally published 10/08/14: http://theincrediblecrew.blogspot.com/2014/10/bring-noise-legendary-seattle-artist.html

Image Standing 1987

Seattle is known as both a place of artistic expression and of issue advocacy.  On one hand Seattle is a place where creativity flourishes and bursts forth in the form of game-changing music, technology, and art appreciation centers; while on the other hand advancing the rights of workers, launching innovative youth outreach programs, and addressing race & social justice issues head-on.

It there is one person that exemplifies Seattle’s dual personality it is artist and youth advocate David Toledo.  A published author, illustrator, musician and playwright; 10 years ago David stepped back (slightly) from the limelight in order to focus on youth advocacy; stopping youth violence, and using the arts to give a new direction to many of Seattle’s at-risk teens.

David and team recently wrapping up the Unified Outreach summer classes and highly acclaimed “Work Training in the Arts” program.  David agreed to sit down with us over a plate of wings and biscuits in Seattle’s Central District.

David:  That’s my high school right there.  They’ve done a lot of renovations but I still like to walk the yard once in a while or slip inside after hours just to breeze through the hallways.

YAC:  Good memories?

David:  Definitely.  I wish I could go back and do it all again… But I’m sure that’s what most people say.

YAC:  You graduated Garfield in 1988?

David:  I was blessed to attend Garfield in the mid 80’s, when the city was exploring cross-city busing as a way to desegregate the Seattle and heal divisions caused by neighborhood redlining.  If you look at my Facebook page you’ll see about 70% of my friends were met at Garfield; but I actually graduated from Ingraham after I was transferred closer to home my senior year.

YAC:  Has the neighborhood changed since you attended Garfield?

David:   I think there is truth to the gentrification argument, that families that have lived in the area for generations being driven out.  Families redlined into the area due to discriminating housing practices that found the good and settled here to put down roots, bought houses, and planned on establishing a home for their children and grandchildren.

“City officials have surrendered to developers, and those that are advocating for the community are just too radical.”

And now we are talking about micro housing and more development but no one is talking about how that will affect the quality of life in the area.  What are the pros and cons?   We have to get a handle on affordable housing issues, and do so in a responsible way.  So far it looks like our city officials have surrendered to developers, and those that are advocating for the community are just too radical.  We need honest mediators to bring both sides together.

YAC:  What would you like to see?

David:  Not all development is bad.  I walked these streets in the 80’s and 90’s and I’m not afraid to share both the triumphs and the tragedies of that time period.  New construction is needed, but we need to respect local establishments that have historical significance.  How can the community partner with the developers to honor these locations?

Anyway, I know you didn’t come here to talk about housing issues.  I’m sure you’d rather talk about all the exciting things we’re doing with the arts.

YAC:  August 30th the Unified Outreach program held its annual youth Fashion Expose.  Can you tell us a little about the work training in the arts program?

d4 (Work Training in the Arts)

David:  Of course, but first let me give you some history.  Being artists ourselves, the volunteers have known the importance of networking and career tracks in being successful.  Politicians are quick to use the quote Pastor Greg Boyle “Nothing stops a bullet like a job”, and we believe that.  However, putting a job in a low income area doesn’t mean that the youth in that area will have access to it.  Which, by the way is why I favor tax breaks or other incentives for hiring employees that live in the same district as the business, but that’s another subject.

Like most who are involved with youth programs we continually heard of kids taking art classes or workshops offered throughout the city- but once the student graduated he/she didn’t know what to do with their newfound artistic skills. So in 2010 we began engaging Mayor McGinn regarding the need for career tracks for any arts programs receiving funding from the city.  We suggested that if a group was seeking city funding that one of the requirements be that the facility provide their students with direction beyond the classroom, and offered our Youth Fashion Expose as an example.  Now one thing about Mayor McGinn is he loved and engaged both Seattle’s youth and the arts.  Mayor McGinn didn’t just listen, he acted, and in 2011 launched the City’s “Work Readiness in the Arts” program, connecting the Office of Arts & Culture, Seattle’s Youth Violence Prevention Initiative (SYVPI), and Non-Profit Arts programs in a partnership to provide job training skills in various artistic mediums.  The program doesn’t have the mandatory “education track or networking” component that we sought, but it is a step in the right direction.

YAC:  Which brings us to the Youth Fashion Expose’?

David:  Exactly!  So what this program offers is work training in event production and management.  We offer the Fashion Expose in partnership with Carlisia Minnis/MAC Fashion House and Lika Love, as well as a Music Industry course featuring Seattle rap artist TYRONE (aka Tyrone Dumas) which is incredible.

“Kids need educational or career direction beyond the initial classroom training.”

In these programs Unified Outreach partners with SYVPI to train 10 at-risk youth (per program) to plan, promote, and deliver an industry level community event.  During a 6-week period students learn facilities management, sound & lighting, promotions, stage set-up, video production, and more.  Then on the final night our instructors step back and allow the students to take full control of the show.  Afterwards we spend a week of programming helping the youth to build resumes, obtain contact information for designers, artists, promoters, and other networking opportunities.  The kids leave the program with the skills to put on any type of large scale event, as well as a strong resume which includes a DVD of the performance and behind the scenes footage.

YAC:  That is an incredible program.  I agree that kids need educational or career direction beyond the initial classroom training.  Your program fills a much needed void in the arts community!  Now let’s talk a little about your personal history.  I think it’s especially appropriate that we talk about your roots in hip hop since we are just steps away from your high school and the spot of one of your most famous works of art?  At one time you were considered one of the best graffiti artist’s in Seattle.  Can you tell me about that?

David:  I suppose I had some neighborhood fame during hip hop’s golden era, back around 1983-1985.  I was pretty well known for doing hip hop art back then.  Unlike today, there weren’t a lot of street artists who did full scale murals, really there were only a handful.  So the minute I put up a 30 foot burner on the Garfield High track field I established myself.  After that if I was at Sir Mixalot jam at the YMCA or Boy’s Club I had a little group of aspiring artists that would congregate around me.

d2 (Image Nemo aerosol 1987)

YAC:  So you were Seattle’s first graffiti muralist?

David:  Oh no! Not at all.  As a matter of fact my first inspiration was the block-long graffiti mural by Kuo (aka Mr. Clean) that changed my life.  I had never seen anything like it.  But by this time there were already other artists establishing themselves with large pieces, such as Spraycan, DadOne, Spaide, Skreen, Nemo, KeepOne, Solo Doe, Faze, Bazerk, and others.  But I had really strong characters, and that helped my pieces to get a little more attention; but all said and done, most of those cats were better with a spray can than me.

YAC:  At what point did you transition from walls to canvas?

David:  I met graffiti artist Sean (Nemo) Casey in 1986.  I had already stopped going out at night and began focusing on my music & dance crew (the Ducky Boys) which had been gaining notoriety at local dance clubs in Seattle and surrounding areas.  I think Nemo and I painted 2 walls together, then Nemo suggested that we really start focusing on canvases. He was into all kinds of artistic mediums, truly gifted.

YAC:  Let’s quickly touch on your dance crew, the Ducky Boys.

David:  So there was a period where kids were growing out of breakdancing, but still looking for something to do at the club (other than dance with girls, go figure).  Enter “the prep” which was a dance battle of sorts.  So kids would have “prep crews” that would go out and dance against each other.  During this brief period (85-87) the most well-known crews (thanks to our appearance on Seattle Bandstand) were the Masters of the Prep (later known as PPIA), the Ballard Boys, and the Ducky Boys.  The dance crew slowly evolved into a musical group with the help of DJ’s Spencer Reed and Kelly Peebles.

d1 (Ducky Boys 1985)

YAC:  That sounds like fun.

David:  It was a great time in my life.  But there were also a couple of times that the guys and I had to fight our way out of the club because the regulars didn’t like to see us win cash prizes in the dance contests.

“He literally had pressed me up over his head and was going to throw me through the storefront window.”

YAC:  Really?  Dance-fight?  Like in West Side Story?

David:  (Laughs) not quite.  Some of these fights were pretty serious, there was one fight where I was literally pressed over this guy’s head and thought he was going to throw me through the storefront window, and honestly, he could have if he wanted to.  Thankfully he decided to simply body slam me to the floor. I’m truly grateful that God never allowed me to go through a window, or to be too severely damaged in a fight, because I put myself in a lot of unnecessary situations trying to represent my crew.

YAC:  I think that a lot of kids are dealing with that same mentality today.  There is a willingness to do some pretty crazy things in order to impress our friends.

David:  It’s true.  The respect and approval of your friends means so much at that age.  It’s funny, because in the situation where I was almost thrown through the window, the guy I got into it with that day probably had more in common with me than anyone else I was hanging with at the time.  He’s gone on to be an author of children’s books, he’s a concert promoter, and he’s really sharp.  If he and I would have sat down with our business hats on we might be running a Fortune 500 company today, man I’d like to have a do-over there.

YAC:  Do you remember what you were fighting about?

David:  Sadly, I don’t.  Which means it was probably something pretty silly.  I can honestly say that most of the altercations I was involved in were due to my trying to protect others.  Do you remember the scene in Forrest Gump, when Forrest sees the hippie boyfriend slap Jenny, and Forrest goes over the table to get him? I guess I was everybody’s Forrest Gump back then.  Even today, it’s hard for me to sit still when I see a person physically or verbally attacking someone who isn’t equipped to fight back.  People can be so mean, and there are some out there that escalate their hostility when they see the person they are attacking is not fighting back.

YAC:  But in this case?

David:  In this case I’m ashamed to say that I think we were fighting about who placed where in a recent dance contest.  It was something really silly, and shamefully embarrassing.

YAC:  Do you feel that having similar experiences helps you to better understand the kids you work with?

David:  I think it helps.  But these kids are also dealing with things that I could never imagine at that age.  Social media brings peer pressure and bullying to a whole new level.  But we just try to lead by example.  I share my stories, successes and failures, in hopes that it helps them to make the right decisions if ever found in similar situations.

David:  Wait a minute.  We’re doing it again.  We’re way off track if this is meant to be a story about the arts program.

YAC:  Well, we’re here to talk about the program but I think your history is also important in understanding what drives you.  But okay, back to the gallery showing.  You artists just can’t seem to stay focused.

David:  (Laughs) Okay, so I met Nemo, who was already doing gallery showings featuring his work with aerosol.  My first pieces were aerosol works as well, featuring hip hop style letters and characters; but I quickly moved from spray-paint to oils and acrylics.  So my early showings were a mixture of both traditional and contemporary works.  One canvas would have a hip hop character and letters, the next canvas would be an oil painting of an old man drinking coffee.  The dramatic leaps of style and mediums impressed some, while leaving others trying to make sense of what, when, and how they were connected.

David Toledo oil paint 1999 (Oils 1999)

YAC:  And from there your next project was what?

David:  I think the early 1990’s were some of my most commercially creative years.  During this time I wrote and acted in various plays, was the lead writer and illustrator for a number of comic books, and performed with Seattle alternative-band “Silly Rabbit” and the rap group Moving Target, along with my brother Dawny and Esera Mose (also releasing and album of the same name).

YAC:  Things were really moving along.  Then what happened?

David:  By 1996 I was working a full time desk job and really focused on a steady white-collar pay check.  I dabbled in various artist mediums, but only sporadically.  But there was also something missing.  I had grown up with a mother who was very involved in helping others.  She took in refugees, let families from church stay with us, and housed foster children.  In the late 1970’s she and a few friends began a soup kitchen at one of the senior housing complexes in Greenwood, and in the early 80’s she started one of the first neighborhood food-banks, from our front porch.  This was a single mother, raising 4 kids on her own, working nights to make ends meet.  But despite her own struggles she was always asking how she could help others; delivering and cooking food, sowing buttons, lending a friendly ear, whatever was needed.

“We operated for nearly a decade with absolutely no funding other than what the volunteers put into the program.”

So here I was, almost 30, and wondering how I could make a difference.  So I started volunteering at a transitional housing shelter in the Central District.  I would go in once a week and draw or paint with the kids, and that’s where my love of youth programming began.

YAC:  Would you say that was the beginning of the Unified Outreach program?

David:  In a way, yes.  So as I began volunteering at other shelters I started to ask other artist friends of mine to help out.  When we would show up to do art classes people would ask what group we were with.  So eventually we thought that we needed to establish a name for the group, and Unified Outreach was born.  That was 1998 when we actually put a name to the program.  We applied for and received 501c3 Charity status in 2004.

YAC:  So you actually celebrated 10 years of charitable status this year?  Congratulations!

David:  Oh yeah, I hadn’t even thought about that.  16 years of programming, with the last 10 years under the 501c3 status.  It’s be a very rewarding, full of ups and downs, but very rewarding.  And during this time I think I really grew as a person.  I spent two years in North Los Angeles/Inglewood volunteering at Christ Gospel Mission as well as the Greater Bethany Food Bank advocating for the homeless, working with at-risk youth, and trying to get a better grasp of issues that affect those around me.  Here in Seattle I’ve worked on affordable housing issues, spoken out against corruption and cronyism in our state government, and called for a return of arts programs to our public schools.

YAC:  What do you see in the future for Unified Outreach?

David:  We really have a lot of programs that are being initiated by former students.  There is a production group that meets weekly at our studios, completely made up of former students and other youth.  I believe the oldest in the group is 20 or 21 years.  They are using the sound booth and video equipment with a goal of producing ready for network commercials and television sitcoms within the next 2 years.

And of course we’re looking at other options for future work training in the arts programs such as cartoon animation, ebook publishing, healthy living programs and other ideas.

YAC:  Any personal arts projects for David Toledo?

David:  I’m working on a cartoon series called the Mascots, and finishing a short script for theater, hopefully both to be completed by the end of 2015.

Mascots w David Toledo  (The Mascots Cartoon)

YAC:  What would you say is Unified Outreach’s biggest accomplishment?

David:  I think just surviving.  We operated for nearly a decade with absolutely no funding other than what the volunteers put into the program.  We didn’t receive our first grant until 2011.  We kept the program alive and running with love, sweat, and tears.

“They continued to spin the story that Unified Outreach had somehow broken the law, calling for arrests and threatening to come down to the art center and confront the kids.”

YAC:  Was there ever a time when you thought about closing the doors?

David:  Yes, sadly there was, and it was tied directly into our first grant, although it was really just about politics.  In 2011 Unified Outreach had received a check from the City for $1000.00 to help with printing of a youth arts newspaper.  My sister was running for office at the time, and supporters of her political opponent attacked our program in an attempt to smear her.  As one would expect the kids writing the articles wrote about what they were doing and seeing at the time, including writing about my sisters run for office since it was something they heard me talking about daily.  Nothing over the top, just some general articles about her run which I still think were very fair and balanced.  Seeing an opportunity to attack my sister, her opponents complained to the city and the elections commission about the paper being political literature.

YAC:  Wow.  What happened?

David:  The city officials called us in a panic, worried about being caught in the middle of a political war.  Before they even asked we offered to give the money back in order to help calm the situation, I wrote them a check that morning.  The elections board looked at the newspaper and agreed with us that there was no wrongdoing, and closed the case.  However, the political partisans continued to spin the story that Unified Outreach had somehow broken the law, calling for arrests and threatening to come down to the art center and confront the kids.

That is the thing that still turns my stomach, how adults can do something so despicable as to harm children (even emotionally) just to gain the political upper hand.  Our kids went from feeling like they had accomplished something major, the production of a complete newspaper – written, drawn, photographed, and published by youth, to feeling like they did something wrong.

(At this point David’s lip quivers, as he seems shaken recounting the events).

Because of those threats we had to think about protecting our students from the mental and potential physical abuse by these political fanatics.  So we closed the doors for a time and cut back on programming until after the race was over.  Once we thought that our students were safe to return we began to schedule classes again.

YAC:  That’s terrible.  I’m glad that you were able to regroup and to continue with your programming.  It’s hard to believe that people can be so wicked, but then again, politics is a dirty game.

I’m not sure if this is a good Segue but over the past few years you have really grown from just and artist into many different areas of advocacy, from curbing youth violence, race & social justice, fair housing, and more.  You seem to have become a real activist.

David:  I think that being active in the community demands that we engage on issues that are important to people.  I always try to approach the dialogue with a humble heart; but we never know where inspiration may come from.  Even if someone has completely different ideas about how things should work, there may be some areas of common ground, and if we listen, there may be some good ideas mixed in with the rhetoric.

YAC:  You’ve recently made attempts to engage Mayor Murray’s office regarding a proposal to establish a department of inner city affairs?

“The proposal received strong opposition from department-heads within the Mayor’s office that feared losing their funding.”

David:  Yes, during the summer of 2014 the Central District and Rainier Valley saw a dramatic increase in youth violence and murders.  Over 10 youth murdered, over 20 overall murders, and over 50 reported gunshots in a 4-month period.  Senior members of the community were crying out for outside the box thinking to engage youth.  Our steering committee put together what we felt was a solid blueprint for the creation of a new department that would cultivate a new partnership between community leaders and public safety officials and access previously unobtainable community resources.

YAC:  And the results of the proposal?

David:  The Mayor’s office refused to meet with us, stating that they already had programs in place to deal with youth violence.  Additionally, I understand the proposal received strong opposition from department-heads within the Mayor’s office that feared losing their funding.

I think the proposal was also just a little too radical.  Our design involved recruiting people from the neighborhood; some of which lacked the usually required degrees, in fact many might not even have their high school diplomas, and maybe had police records, whose only education was on the streets, but that the kids doing the violence know and look up to.  These people didn’t fit into the Mayor’s plan for youth engagement.  The city still sees the best course of action to curb the violence as college educated counselors and social workers from Ivy League Schools.

It was also mentioned to us by inside sources that there was a fear that meeting with us would give the proposal and the proposed community leader’s legitimacy and shine a spotlight on areas that our city officials would rather keep in the dark.

YAC:  Like turning on a light in the kitchen and seeing roaches scatter?

David:  The message we got is to not rock the boat. So rather than continue to beat on a closed door we are looking at other ways to bring change on a smaller scale.  We must continuing to engage kids in one-on-one relationships through arts programs, music, mentoring, and just being a part of the community.

And thankfully there are other great programs that are active in the area that we hope to partner with in the future.  Groups like B.U.I.L.D. and programs like Hack the CD that have outstanding leadership and are making a difference where they are needed most.

YAC:  I feel like we could sit and talk about arts programs and community involvement all day, but we have to end the article at some point.  Let me rattle off a few topics and please try to answer in one or two sentences if possible.

“Other than the festivals, Seattle Center is always deserted, but that’s what happens when you have an Arts Commission that is heavily populated with lawyers and real estate developers.”

YAC:  Best thing about growing up in Seattle.

David:  Summertime at Greenlake and at the Seattle Center Fun Forrest.  Two things break my heart, going to Greenlake and seeing “no swimming due to toxic algae” and visiting Seattle Center and seeing a once vibrant community meeting place practically a ghost town.  Other than the festivals, Seattle Center is always deserted, but that’s what happens when you have an Arts Commission that is heavily populated with lawyers and real estate developers.

YAC:  Favorite thing about Seattle today?

David:  Seahawks baby!

YAC:  First thing you would do if you were the Mayor?

David:  Personal camera’s on police officers.  We need that to protect our officers who put their lives on the line every day and need that documentation when they are forced escalate a situation.  And we need it for our communities who may have lost confidence in our public safety offices due to past experiences.

YAC:  If you could talk to the David Toledo of 1990 what would you say?

David:  Find and marry a good woman.  We are created as incomplete beings; having a partner that you can share this journey with is a blessing that I took too long to embrace.

YAC:  Your hero?

David:  My mom, who I love with all my heart.

YAC:  Favorite thing to do?

David:  Dance-off competitions with my daughter, nephews, and nieces.

Dance Point   (Daddy Daughter Dance-Off)

YAC:  Advice for struggling artists?

David:  Find artists with similar drive, ambition, and vision and build together.

YAC:  Advice for political activists?

David:  (laughs) No, no advice.  I’m still figuring it out, and what I do know about politics, I don’t like.

YAC:  Final words?

David:  I’ll just leave you with a favorite scripture, James 2:15 “Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

ARTICLE WRITTEN BY:  M. KaPOWsley

PHOTOS MAY BE USED WITH PUBLICATON OF THIS ARTICLE.

Proposal for the creation of a Department of Inner City Affairs within the Seattle Mayor’s Office

TO:  Seattle City Council/Office of the Mayor                    DATE:  June 13, 2014

FROM:  David Toledo/Unified Outreach                            RE:  Establishment of Department of Inner-City Affairs

Proposed

To establish a Department of Inner-City Affairs (DOICA) within the City of Seattle Mayor’s office to address issues specific to Seattle’s Central District and Rainier Valley in order to assist in reducing the amount of criminal activity in Seattle with the use of “outside the box” youth programming and community liaisons that will be proactive in preventing violence, advancing race & social justice issues, and providing a mutually-beneficial partnership with Seattle’s public safety officers to provide previously unattainable neighborhood resources when crimes do occur.

Doica word 2

Background

There have been 7 young adults murdered a number of shootings in the Seattle Central District and Rainier Valley since Spring began, including shots fired at a vehicle as it was being ticketed by the KC Sheriff’s Department.

Budgetary Allocation:  We propose that the city use money already allocated to programs in the Office of Arts & Culture/Department of Neighborhoods to cover any costs associated with the program.  We propose 20% from each Department be allocated to the Department of Inner City Affairs.

Supervisory Relationship:  Director of theDOICA Reporting directly to the Seattle City Council or the Mayor.

WHO is committing the Crime?

One thing about youth crime and violence is that SOMEONE knows something.  The kids know who is doing what in the community; so the question is how does that information come to light?

Thinking OUTSIDE of the Box:

Within every youth community there are “networks” operating; kids who have formed communities-within-communities based on common interests.  Within urban communities we see an even closer kinship between youth who bond over artistic interests; kids who envision a career selling millions of albums rapping know the other kids in the city who share that dream.  The break-dancers know who the other break-dancers are; the graffiti artists know who the graffiti artists are.  These communal groups can be a great resource if we have the right liaison between the youth and our community leaders/authorities.

Who do these kids TRUST?

Obtaining information from kids can be a complicated task.  There is no doubt that the knowledge of who has committed the crime (violent or otherwise) is generally known in the community.  But because of community loyalty, the mistrust of those in authority, or the fear of reprisal, many witnesses are afraid to come forward.

From our experience growing up in these communities and continuing to work with low income and at-risk youth we believe many low income and at-risk youth are more responsive to those in the (shared) artistic body, and those seen as old school/OG’s (original gangsters) who have established themselves in the neighborhood.

The same kid that is hesitant to share knowledge of a known criminal act with a parent, teacher, or police officer will easily share that information in casual conversation with their breakdance instructor or one of the OG’s at a neighborhood picnic.

Departmental Structure/Use of Liaisons:

We are proposing that the DOICA be headed by an Executive Director who answers either to the City Council or the Mayor.  The Director of DOICA will appoint 4-5 Program Directors who will report to him/her.  Each Program Director will have 10 Program Administrators assigned to a specific grid in either Seattle’s Central District or Rainier Valley (known as BBQ zones); each Program Administrator will have one assistant.

If is further recommended that the DOICA be permitted the power to appoint one Board Member to each of the following Commissions to ensure that the DOICA program is able to reach its maximum potential.  We recommend a DOICA voice on the Arts Commission, Community Police Commission, and the Human Rights Commission.

With the DOICA in place we believe that Seattle will be able to dramatically decrease violence.

We are proposing that those OG’s that are also active in the artistic field be recruited to act as liaisons between our at-risk youth and our community leaders/authorities.  Community leaders such as Pastor Ray Rogers, Dr. James Croone, Tyrone Dumas, and many more who have a 20/30+ year history in these neighborhoods and are “neighborhood famous” in Seattle’s CD and South-end of Seattle are needed.  These are respected elders you can find at neighborhood barbeques and community events and when they speak the kids listen.

These community elders are artists and arts administrators in their own right; hosting musical performances, parties, and community events where youth engagement occurs.  Events where troubled youth are recognized, conflicts resolved, lives set straight; yet these events will never be approved for a Department of Neighborhoods or Office of Arts & Culture Youth Arts grant because they don’t fit the Arts Commission’s idea of what an artist looks or sounds like.  The same type-A personality, the direct speaking style, the same REALNESS that makes these people attractive to our youth are seen as negatives by Seattle’s artistic gate-keepers and turned away from receiving artistic and community grants.  So the key is to design program partnerships that recruit these OG’s and back their programs; with the understanding that there is an open communication and true working partnership with the select branches of law enforcement, courts, and other areas of public safety.  We are confident that Unified Outreach has a blueprint for such a partnership; an achievable plan to save lives.

Accessing the necessary FUNDING:

The City of Seattle already spends millions of tax payer dollars each year on youth arts, sports, and technology programs.  Many of these programs are already making a difference in the lives of our children; however, in order to meet today’s needs it is obvious we must try something different.

Currently the Office of Arts & Cultural Affairs has a budget of $8.5 million, and the Department of Neighborhoods has a budget of $12.4 million (combined nearly $21 million).  Not surprisingly, these departments often have a surplus (Large Project Fund is one example).  We propose 20% from each Department be allocated to the Department of Inner City Affairs in order to support a new Department operating under the guidelines that have been provided in this memo.  A more comprehensive operational structure and staffing hierarchy can be provided to the Mayor’s office and the City Council at their request.

What is the value of a human life?  Are the 7 lives lost over the last few months worth less because they are from the Central District and Rainier Valley?  $5.3 million per year towards the DOICA is reasonable and the return each year in the lives saved cannot be measured.  If city leaders can put $21 million each year to simply “enrich through art” the lives of those in Seattle, isn’t it worth $5.3 million to actually SAVE those same lives?  Would it be a more palatable program if it funded programs in Magnolia? Queen Anne? Lake Union?  These are hard questions that deserve answers.

Our proposal is a viable solution to reducing crime and providing safer streets.  However, because it is a new and unique approach to solving the problem it is bound to encounter pushback from the status quo; and as such will need visionary leaders to champion this as we move forward.  Seattle’s leadership must get out of its comfort zone and begin engaging in a more indigenous form of youth outreach, which requires bringing in oversight that understands the working relationship between this new style of community leader (OG’s), and at-risk youth.

The neighborhood elders that have contributed to the actualization of this proposal would be honored to serve on the steering committee as the City begins its search for a qualified candidate to serve as Director of this newly established Department.  These are men raised in Seattle’s CD and Rainier Valley and still have deep connections to those communities.  We know the neighborhoods, the kids, and the community leaders (OG’s) that can make this program a success.

AVOIDING Common Mistakes:

We have to avoid the common mistake of just throwing money at the problem.  We have to resist the urge to simply throw money at “established youth, arts, and community programs” in the area who may produce fine programming but do not know how to reach our target audience; and who (once they have received the special funding) will simply hire the same old friends & family and list them as “Special OG consultants”.  Not every person living in the CD and Rainier Valley for decades is respected by the community.  Also, there are many artists and arts/programs already operating that don’t reach the kids we are talking about.  We need to recruit REAL community-leader OG’s that have a PROVEN history of working with our YOUTH.  The people living in the neighborhoods that are being affected by this wave of violence KNOW who the people are that are working to make a difference.  The creation of a Department of Inner-City Affairs (DOICA) within the City of Seattle Mayor’s office, with the right people in leadership roles CAN and WILL save lives.

Proposed Department of Inner-City Affairs Mission Statement

“City of Seattle’s commitment to reducing violence and promoting justice for every community.”

Thank you for your time and consideration.  Unified Outreach and the Steering Committee would be honored to present our proposal to the Seattle City Council and/or Mayor Murray in a public hearing as determined by the Seattle City Council and Mayor’s Office.

“Ask the Mayor” town hall inspires little confidence for stopping the rising youth murder rate in Seattle.

Whats the Number

A question was asked from the audience, “Mr. Mayor, what is the number?”

The man at the microphone continued the question, “Prior to Sunday night’s murder of yet another inner city youth, the Mayor’s office had received a proposal for the establishment of a Department of Inner City Affairs.  The proposal (as written) is strongly supported by this hurting community; yet the Mayor’s office has failed to respond to the proposal or even engage in basic dialogue with the proposal’s steering committee. “

“8 dead youth in the last 3 months, and 16 overall killings in the area; and still the Mayor and City Council refuse to think outside of the box. They continue to push that their way is best, despite the continued loss of life.”

“So my question is what number of murdered children are the Mayor and the City Council waiting to see before they accept help in solving this problem?”

The Mayor’s response, although sincere, seemed to echo sound bites from the City Council address, “pre-K education, neighborhood policing, jobs for the area.”  In other words, we’ll keep the status quo; nothing to see here… move along people, move along.

“…those involved in these existing programs admit this “assessment” is just a rehash of the previous mayor’s ideas.”

Mayor Murray went on to say that he is seeking input from other mayor’s outside of Seattle, looking for ideas on the best way to curb the violence.  Again, genuinely seeking answers to the problem of continued violence and record youth murder rates over the last 3 months.  But the idea of soliciting voices from other city mayors caused some in the crowd to wonder why we are asking for advice from those outside of the city while failing to engage the community itself on the issue of a Department of Inner City Affairs.

Sounding like a man of action, the mayor promised a “complete assessment of crime prevention programs targeting and helping 18-30 year olds.”  However, even those involved in these existing programs admit this “assessment” is just a rehash of the previous mayor’s ideas and opportunity to increase funding of already operating programs; successful in reaching some “at-risk” youth, but doing little to reach those who are responsible for the rise in violence and murder. 

“…to think these kids can be reached the same way and with the same program shows how far removed the Mayor and this City Council are from what is happening at street level.”

Neither the Mayor nor the Council members grasp the fact that the kids involved in the recent violence and murders are not being reached by existing programs.  For city leaders to think that the kid who was arrested for shoplifting and is now painting murals with the city’s violence prevention program has the same mentality as the kid who shot at another youth in front of the mini-mart because he was “disrespected” or is “doing-dirt” to get a name for himself… to think these kids can be reached in the same manner and with the same program shows how far removed the Mayor and this City Council are from what is happening at street level. The Mayor and the City Council don’t understand that there is a sliding scale on the at-risk spectrum; and that the needs, wants, and desires of at-risk youth change from one teen to the next.  Despite making for good headlines, the rehashing and increased funding of the same old departments will make no significant progress in stopping the rise of violent crime and murder in the Central District and Rainier Valley.

“The Mayor and the City Council don’t understand that there is a sliding scale on the at-risk spectrum; and that the needs, wants, and desires of at-risk youth change from one teen to the next.”

Those affected by this violence are demanding more substance and fresh ideas.  The Mayor says he wants to “change the narrative” in how the neighborhoods and public safety officials communicate; but so far, critics say there they’ve seen no real blueprint for how the city plans to do that.  What the Mayor appears to be saying (or at least thinking) is that there is a one-size fits all “at-risk youth” demographic, which is being taken care of by the programs already in place.

One thing everyone agrees is a positive is that the mayor’s plan does continue the relationships previously  established by former Mayor’s Nickels and McGinn, such as partnering with the community, local businesses, local sports teams, and faith-based organizations to discourage the “no-snitch” code” and build a more trusting relationship between these communities and public safety officers.  These programs should be celebrated for the good that they do; but the Mayor needs to understand that there is a component missing; and that piece is filled by the Department of Inner City Affairs liaison position.

“…what number of murdered children are the Mayor and the City Council waiting to see before they accept help in solving this problem?”

The previous Mayor, Michael McGinn had a very high level of respect within the Rainier Valley and Central District communities because of his heavy involvement in youth programming and innovative approach to working with inner city community youth advocates.  However, if even under Mayor McGinn the programs were unable to reach the youth responsible for the increase in violence and murders.  Why then, would Mayor Murray believe that somehow the results of these programs will change now that he is at the helm?  Does he know something that those living in the community for generations don’t?

Until Mayor Murray and the City Council are willing to open their minds to the idea that there is another way to address the problem, the violence and murder will continue; and we will ask again and again, “What is the number?”

 

Arts program and Rainier Valley OG’s ambitious plan to stop out of control youth murder rate.

GRASS-ROOTS YOUTH ARTS PROGRAM UNIFIED OUTREACH AND STREET-WISE COMMUNITY LEADERS FROM SEATTLE’S CENTRAL DISTRICT AND RAINIER VALLEY PROPOSE A NEW “DEPARTMENT OF INNER CITY AFFAIRS” BE ESTABLISHED IN THE MAYORS OFFICE TO ADDRESS ISSUES SPECIFIC TO INNER-CITY YOUTH WITH “OUTSIDE THE BOX” THINKING.

June 20, 2014 – Youth Arts program Unified Outreach has put forth an ambitious proposal for the creation of a new department within the Mayor’s office. The new Department of Inner-City Affairs would address issues specific to Seattle’s Central District and Rainier Valley in order to assist in reducing the amount of criminal activity in Seattle with the use of “outside the box” youth programming and community liaisons that will be proactive in preventing violence, advancing race & social justice issues, and providing a mutually-beneficial partnership with Seattle’s public safety officers to provide previously unattainable neighborhood resources when crimes do occur.

This coalition has dedicated themselves to finding a solution to the violence. With 7 youths dead at the hands of other kids, 15 overall killings, and nearly 50 reports of gunshots in the CD and Rainier Valley since spring began this is something most in Seattle have never experienced; and certainly not expected in our peaceful Northwest Mecca.

However, for most of the untouched areas of Seattle business goes on as usual; with a Seattle media seemingly out of touch with what is happening (one paper referring to the recent epidemic of shootings as “few injuries reported” despite the 7 dead kids), and city leadership that ranges from oblivious to the problem to disgustingly opportunistic. As for the few city leaders who have shown attention, their ideas for solving the problems are the typical sound bites you’d expect; pre-K education, increase minimum wage, more jobs, and so on. As well intentioned as they are, the ideas are woefully out of touch with the thoughts and minds of those responsible for inciting the violence.

The strange thing is Seattle is no Los Angeles or Chicago; Seattle isn’t a giant metropolis where the hotspots of violence can span a hundred miles; no, our hotspots are along 23rd Avenue South and Rainier Ave S., really just a few square miles. Sadly, and without doubt the same mothers and father who have lost children to this violence work in and around city hall, frequent the same coffee shops and sandwich stores; yet city business goes on as though nothing is out of the ordinary. This is why a Department of Inner-City Affairs is needed!

The proposed idea works like this;

Within every youth community there are “networks” operating; kids who have formed communities-within-communities based on common interests. Within urban communities we see an even closer kinship between youth who bond over artistic interests; kids who envision a career selling millions of albums rapping know the other kids in the city who share that dream. The break-dancers know who the other break-dancers are; the graffiti artists know who the graffiti artists are. These communal groups can be a great resource if we have the right liaison between the youth and our community leaders/authorities.

One thing about youth crime and violence is that SOMEONE knows something. The kids know who is doing what in the community; so the question is how does that information come to light?

Obtaining information from kids can be a complicated task. There is no doubt that the knowledge of who has committed the crime (violent or otherwise) is generally known in the community. But because of community loyalty, the mistrust of those in authority, or the fear of reprisal, many witnesses are afraid to come forward.

Unified Outreach, along with the community elders involved in the proposal have put their experience growing up in these communities and continuing to work with low income and at-risk youth to work; believing many low income and at-risk youth are more responsive to those in the (shared) artistic body, and those seen as old school/OG’s (original gangsters) who have established themselves in the neighborhood.

The same kid that is hesitant to share knowledge of a known criminal act with a parent, teacher, or police officer will easily share that information in casual conversation with their breakdance instructor or one of the OG’s at a neighborhood picnic.

The proposals idea is that those OG’s that are also active in the artistic field be recruited to act as liaisons between the city’s at-risk youth and the city community leaders/authorities. Community leaders such as Pastor Ray Rogers, Dr. James Croone, Tyrone Dumas, and many more who have a 20/30+ year history in these neighborhoods and are “neighborhood famous” in Seattle’s CD and South-end of Seattle are needed. These are respected elders you can find at neighborhood barbeques and community events and when they speak the kids listen.

These community elders are artists and arts administrators in their own right; hosting musical performances, parties, and community events where youth engagement occurs. Events where troubled youth are recognized, conflicts resolved, lives set straight; yet these events will never be approved for a Department of Neighborhoods or Office of Arts & Culture Youth Arts grant because they don’t fit the Arts Commission’s idea of what an artist looks or sounds like. The same type-A personality, the direct speaking style, the same REALNESS that makes these people attractive to our youth are seen as negatives by Seattle’s artistic gate-keepers and turned away from receiving artistic and community grants. So the key is to design program partnerships that recruit these OG’s and back their programs; with the understanding that there is an open communication and true working partnership with the select branches of law enforcement, courts, and other areas of public safety. There is confidence that Unified Outreach has a blueprint for such a partnership; an achievable plan to save lives.

The City of Seattle already spends millions of tax payer dollars each year on youth arts, sports, and technology programs. Many of these programs are already making a difference in the lives of our children; however, in order to meet today’s needs it is obvious we must try something different.

Currently the Office of Arts & Cultural Affairs has a budget of $8.5 million, and the Department of Neighborhoods has a budget of $12.4 million (combined nearly $21 million). Not surprisingly, these departments often have a surplus (Large Project Fund is one example). The proposal suggests 20% from each Department be allocated to the Department of Inner City Affairs in order to support a new Department operating under the guidelines that have been provided in this memo.

What is the value of a human life? Are the 7 lives lost worth less because they are kids from the Central District and Rainier Valley? $5.3 million per year towards the DOICA is reasonable and the return each year in the lives saved cannot be measured. If city leaders can put $21 million each year to simply “enrich through art” the lives of those in Seattle, isn’t it worth $5.3 million to actually SAVE those same lives? Would it be a more palatable program if it funded programs in Magnolia? Queen Anne? Lake Union? These are hard questions that deserve answers.

The proposal is a viable solution to reducing crime and providing safer streets. However, because it is a new and unique approach to solving the problem it is bound to encounter pushback from the status quo; and as such will need visionary leaders to champion this as we move forward. Seattle’s leadership must get out of its comfort zone and begin engaging in a more indigenous form of youth outreach, which requires bringing in oversight that understands the working relationship between this new style of community leader (OG’s), and at-risk youth.

Unified Outreach believes the program can be a success; if city leaders take care to avoid the common mistake of just throwing money at the problem. City leaders have to resist the urge to simply throw money at “established youth, arts, and community programs” in the area who may produce fine programming but do not know how to reach our target audience; and who (once they have received the special funding) will simply hire the same old friends & family and list them as “Special Consultants”. Not every person living in the CD and Rainier Valley for decades is respected by the community. Also, there are many artists and arts/programs already operating that don’t reach the kids we are talking about. We need to recruit REAL community-leader OG’s that have a PROVEN history of working with our YOUTH. The people living in the neighborhoods that are being affected by this wave of violence KNOW who the people are that are working to make a difference. The creation of a Department of Inner-City Affairs (DOICA) within the City of Seattle Mayor’s office, with the RIGHT people in leadership roles CAN and WILL save lives.

Proposed Department of Inner-City Affairs Mission Statement

“City of Seattle’s commitment to reducing violence and promoting justice for every community.”Image