Persistence: “Noun. Firm or obstinate continuance in a course of action in spite of difficulty or opposition.”

/

65 Upper Cross Road was put up for sale for $24.995 million in October 2023, and its MLS listing expired in October 2024. It’s back today at $24.995 million.

Twenty-two acres, 19,950 square feet, which presumably includes the six-car garage and (secluded) guest house. Part of Conyers Farm, although that hasn’t been a selling point for quite a few years due, I believe, to market demand shifting closer to town.

From its listing:
Remarks: Spectacular Converse Lake direct waterfront estate in coveted Conyers Farm Association. Featuring a custom Shope Reno Wharton designed residence and two bedroom guest house with full kitchen both completely renovated down to studs and redesigned for today's lifestyle. Enter to see sophisticated and chic interiors throughout three floors of light filled living space with dramatic open views to the private lake. Property includes a tennis court, indoor pool, outdoor spa, sauna, three stop elevator, floating dock all behind handsome gates with CFA security service. A one of a kind family compound with privacy yet convenience to downtown Greenwich and Manhattan. The offering is two lots to convey together. Opportunity to use approved plans to build outdoor pool and pool house if desired.

Cutler Road short sale has a contract

/

85 Cutler Road, currently listed at $2.5 million, reports a contract; it began at $3.250 in March 2020, and the first lis pendens was filed against it in 2018. The former, or soon-to-be owners paid $2.2 million for it in 2007. I’m not making fun of them, because this is sad, not humorous, and I’m sorry to see them lose their house. (It is a wreck, though.)

Talking to you, Republicans

/

Libby Emmons:

Blame our gutless Congress for Trump’s infinite national emergencies

The incessant inaction of Congress means that President Donald Trump is increasingly using emergency powers to get things done. 

From tariffs to immigration to cartels to crime, Trump has repeatedly cited the National Emergencies Act of 1976 to gain the authority to take action.

It shouldn’t be this way. 

Congress is perfectly capable of legislating on these issues and more, but its members are too consumed with staging victimhood pageants and crying on the Capitol steps to pass laws and demand their enforcement.

Take tariffs: Trump declared an emergency to impose them on many US trading partners, aiming to give America an upper hand — or at least equality — in global commerce.

That’s traditionally the job of Congress, which can also expressly delegate tariff authority to the president.

Instead, Congress has done nothing — it hasn’t taken charge, and it hasn’t handed tariff powers to Trump outright.

Members have just sat by and watched the matter grind its way through the courts. Sure, blame politics. Republicans hold the House and Senate, but their majorities are so slim that they’re afraid to use power lest they make a misstep and lose it.

Democrats are playing to far-left voters who will eat their own if they sense any deviation from party orthodoxy.

Compromise won’t keep anyone’s constituents happy — quite the opposite.

Once, Congress was all about finding common ground. Now it’s about holding a hard line and never giving an inch, on both sides.

Gutless.

[snip]

Americans gave Trump a mandate to deport illegal immigrants after President Joe Biden flung open the borders and signed all comers up for government benefits.

Biden wrung his hands, saying he couldn’t stem the tide, that he needed Congress to act. It didn’t.

Trump has shown that if members of Congress are too busy navel-gazing, posting TikToks and proposing self-aggrandizing bills that will never pass, he will rescue the country from chaos.

And Congress has still done nothing, content to let the fate of the nation be decided in the courtrooms of activist judges who see themselves as arbiters of global justice — not American laws.

[snip]

Unilateral executive action is not the ideal, we know that — it’s a concept we ditched when we threw all that tea in the harbor.

We are not a people who wish to be ruled by fiat.

As our founding documents established, we are meant to have our say via our representatives in the people’s House.

It’s up to our members of Congress to act on our behalf, so why won’t they?

We’d rather see our representatives act as if they have a stake in this nation beyond the next Election Day.

Governing by emergency, tackling one crisis after another with executive power, is not how our system was designed to work.

But our system is not working, as members of Congress show up on news shows more often than they show up for their constituents.

Trump is taking a huge risk by staking his presidency on handling each of these issues with emergency powers.

If he fails, we’ll know who to blame.

But if Trump succeeds — if immigration is curbed, if drug cartels are destroyed, if tariffs enrich us, if more Americans buy their own homes — we’ll know who deserves the praise.

Libby Emmons is the editor-in-chief at the Post Millennial.

Related:John Hinderaker, PowerLine:

Democrats Smash All Norms of Democracy

Our Constitution assumes a certain level of good faith on the part of people who participate in public life. It is not a system that can preside over a state of civil war. So throughout our history, there have been unwritten norms of conduct that grow out of a simple imperative: if we want to have a functioning democracy, a certain degree of cooperation between the parties is mandatory.

But in recent years, the Democratic Party has in effect declared a state of war against the rest of us. They have abandoned, one after another, the informal norms that allow our democracy to function. Rather than viewing Republicans as fellow citizens with whom they have disagreements, but with whom they share a common interest in the well-being of our nation, they see Republicans as enemies whose objects are entirely different from theirs and who, therefore, must be fought at every turn.

A case in point is the Democrats’ effort to block President Trump from staffing his administration. Historically, both parties have assumed that a president has the right to staff his administration with nominees of his choosing. Thus, while nominees occasionally have been controversial, routine staff decisions have gone forward without opposition. The Democrats have renounced this tradition, as this chart by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity shows:

Senate Republicans may finally have had enough of unprecedented Democratic obstructionism. The Democrats have required a lengthy process of cloture and final passage votes for every single nominee, grinding the Senate to a halt and keeping hundreds of qualified nominees from getting on the job now well into Trump’s term.

…. What to do about the Democrats’ obstructionism?

If Democrats don’t relent and let Trump get his team on the job, Senate Republicans should change the rules to limit the hours of debate and allow multiple nominees to be approved together. Trump deserves to have his team in place.

The Democrats’ conduct would be a scandal if they had a Senate majority. The fact that they are engaging in unprecedented obstructionism when they are in the minority should not be tolerated.

“Should not be tolerated”? Of course it shouldn’t, but that’s exactly what the Republicans have been doing since January. Senate Majority “Leader” Thune is expected to try to at least partially push past Schumer et al.’s obstruction of 148 civilian appointees this week, but (a) it’s entirely possible that two, even three RINOs will refuse to go along and thus thwart the effort; and (b) that still won’t address Emmons’ point: almost every one of the court cases blocking execution of Trump’s unilateral executive orders is grounded on a supposed lack of congressional authorization; nothing is preventing the Republican-controlled Congress from providing that authorization but Republican pusillanimity.

He calls this weekly column "Sunday Smiles", but sometimes, they aren't particularly funny — just sad. (Updated: X's censors hid the original Tweet and it disappeared. I have now restored it))

/

Davis Strom at HotAir:

As usual, before he posts various memes he’s found during the week, Strom starts with a perceptive essay

George Orwell famously said that "some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them," or at least some variation of that line. The origin is disputed, but the sentiment should not be. 

There are a lot of such ideas floating around these days, but the number of people who profess to believe them is actually quite large. That's because, over the past 50 years, there has been a consistent effort to turn ever more people into "intellectuals" by sending them off to colleges and universities for educations that achieve little more than detaching them from reality. 

Higher education can, in principle, serve a vital function in society. It is important to create a class of people who have been educated in history, political philosophy, science, and the other liberal arts. And, of course, modern technological society benefits mightily from developing a research and technical class that specializes in disciplines that expand our economy and improve our well-being. 

But most people benefit little or at all from modern "higher education." The original idea was that higher education teaches people how to think, not what to think, and expands the number of people with a more synoptic view, enhancing democratic governance.

How has that worked out? 

The result is a midwit class. Over-educated in the sense that they feel as if they have been given the keys to the intellectual kingdom, but are largely incapable of original thought. Divorced from common sense--education through experience--they rely on believing what they are told by an "expert" or intellectual class. If they read something in the Times or The Atlantic, they assume it is well thought out and true. 

For me, the ultimate example of that phenomenon was the COVID pandemic response, and in particular, the religious belief in the utility of cloth and surgical masks. People purchased decorated cloth masks, or religiously wore surgical masks that left gaping holes around the mouth and nose, and yet believed these would protect them from a virus whose size could legitimately be measured at the nano-scale. 

Even more absurd is that they would put these masks on and take them off multiple times--putting the virus directly and for extended periods of time right next to their nose, all while believing in the talismanic power of a piece of cloth. It only took a moment's thought to realize that the idea was absurd on its face, but belief in expertise short-circuited the ability or inclination to think at all. 

Instead, they were weaponized against the people who exercised independent thought. The amount of hate directed at us was astronomical. There was talk of concentration camps, vaccine passports, and taking away children from dissenters. 

People wore masks outside; children were banned from playing in the sun. Lone people at beaches or out on the ocean were arrested. 

All because "experts" said they should be. 

The "woman" waving her penis is a version of this. Any sane person knows that women don't have penises, but midwit "experts" tell us they do so. Pravda dutifully repeats it, and the entire judicial system bends itself to enforce an absurdity. 

The creation of midwittery--a relatively modern invention--has unmoored people from reality. It's not that common sense is infallible — that is why societies depend on well-educated elites to play with ideas and debate among themselves, as most of us live our lives in the workaday world. 

The midwit class is the most dangerous to society. Without them, intellectuals couldn't spread the absurdities beyond their own circle of influence, and the intellectual class would be less able to enforce among each other the worst ideas, and they would die a more natural death. Midwits revel in adopting absurd ideas because it gives them special power over ordinary people. The more absurd the better. 

That's how we get news stories describing women waving their penises at children.

Brave souls leave the safety of their suburban homes and march to keep their little brown brothers free from fascism (Updated)

/

AND:

Maryland residents tell Don Lemon they approve of Trump's crime crackdown, hope Baltimore is next

Former CNN anchor Don Lemon spoke to locals in a Baltimore neighborhood Friday, and many expressed hope President Donald Trump would deploy troops to "straighten everything out."

When Trump announced plans to deploy National Guard troops and assume oversight of the Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser initially expressed concern. 

However, she admitted at a press conference last week that the federal surge has had a noticeable impact on one of America's most dangerous cities, including a 87% reduction in carjackings.

Now, leaders and residents of other cities are wondering if he will bring troops to crack down on crime in their neighborhoods as well. Lemon did an extensive man-on-the-street interview, asking residents of a rough neighborhood in Baltimore if they would like to see troops in their neighborhood. 

"I have been a resident of Maryland all my life, so I think it would help some," one older woman said in his video, saying her husband was murdered in a carjacking in front of their house and claiming there were no consequences for the perpetrator, who remains unknown to this day. "I want justice."

"And you would like to see the troops here and the National Guard?" Lemon asked.

"Yes," she answered.

"It's getting out of hand, man," another resident, a male Trump supporter, answered. "All these killings all the time. You know, the murder rate's going higher and higher and all the drugs."

He lamented that government programs aren't working to ameliorate the causes of crime in the area. 

"Send the troops to straighten everything out, you know what I mean? And then, like, you know, make Baltimore great again," he said. "Rebuild it back how it was a long time ago."

A man in Muslim garb on his way to pray at a mosque for Friday Jummah argued that Trump sending troops to the streets might be a welcome change.

"I’m not opposed to it," the man said. "I think it’ll be a good idea. Maybe we can clean up some of these crime-ridden neighborhoods."

He went on to describe local crime levels as "atrocious" and said that such a change would be "a breath of fresh air."

UPDATE: D.C. suburbanites also turned out for “Show Your Care Day”, and Ted Cruz noticed the same phenomenon.

Cruz detractors claim that he’s only pretending to be concerned about the welfare of these playful wards of the state, while they, they, the passionate mothers of McLean, are the real saviors. To which one X commenter posted this quote from Malcolm X:

"The law says what I say it means" (Updated)

/

Federal immigration law empowers the U.S. Attorney General, at his sole discretion, to grant temporary protected status to certain individuals; that protection lasts for a minimum of 6 months and a maximum of 18, unless the Attorney General extends it for another period not to exceed 18 months. Until now, those extensions have been routinely granted (the Haitians are here because of an earthquake that hit that beknighted island in 2010), but practicing the usual D.C. routine ended this past January 20th, so ….

Earlier this year the Trump administration purported revoke the latest extension granted by the previous administration, and sought to remove 600,000 Venuelans and 500,000 Haitians. Not surprisingly, they sued, and also not surprisingly, in March a San Francisco Obama Judge in the 9th Circuit blocked the termination and the removal of the unfortunate invitees. On appeal, the Supreme Court in May, (8-1) lifted the judge’s block, and sent the case back down for further action. Yesterday, that same judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs again and because, he claimed, the Supreme Court ruling only addressed his first, temporary block, he was free to issue a permanent one, which he proceeded to do. Hilarity has ensued.

DHS fires back at 'activist judges' blocking temporary protected status crackdown

DHS calls temporary protected status program 'abused' and 'exploited' as de facto amnesty

…. Judge Edward Chen, of the Northern District of California, wrote in his ruling that ending the TPS was "unprecedented" and that Noem’s actions broke the law.

…. TPS for Venezuelans and Haitians was granted under the Biden administration, as the qualifiers for immigrants from a country to get the status include an active war or a major public health crisis in their homeland. 

…. "The environmental situation in Haiti has improved enough that it is safe for Haitian citizens to return home," a DHS spokesperson said of Haiti in July. "We encourage these individuals to take advantage of the Department’s resources in returning to Haiti, which can be arranged through the CBP Home app. Haitian nationals may pursue lawful status through other immigration benefit requests, if eligible."

Trump may have acted precipitously in trying to end the TPS status of these people before the expiration of latest extension granted by Biden’s handlers, and that, I presume, is the basis for Judge Chen’s claim to have jurisdiction over the matter, but here’s the thing: the extension ends either in 4 days — September 10th — or, if a seperate renegade judge’s ruling holds this coming January (and I expect the Supreme Court to slap down both judges, hard, before then), so the case should soon be moot. Once the extensions are over, the decision to grant any further extension is solely the Attorney General’s to make, and is not subject to judicial review.

You can read the entire text of the applicable law at issue here at 8 USC §1254 - a Temporary protected status here. Here are excerpts germaine to the current case:

§1254a. Temporary protected status

(a) Granting of status

(1) In general

In the case of an alien who is a national of a foreign state designated under subsection (b) (or in the case of an alien having no nationality, is a person who last habitually resided in such designated state) and who meets the requirements of subsection (c), the Attorney General, in accordance with this section-

(A) may grant the alien temporary protected status in the United States and shall not remove the alien from the United States during the period in which such status is in effect, and

(B) shall authorize the alien to engage in employment in the United States and provide the alien with an "employment authorized" endorsement or other appropriate work permit.

The Attorney General … may [bolding added “may” is not “shall” — ed] designate any foreign state under this subsection only if —

(A) the Attorney General finds that there is an ongoing armed conflict within the state and, due to such conflict, requiring the return of aliens who are nationals of that state to that state (or to the part of the state) would pose a serious threat to their personal safety; or

(B) the Attorney General finds that—

(i) there has been an earthquake, flood, drought, epidemic, or other environmental disaster in the state resulting in a substantial, but temporary, disruption of living conditions in the area affected, [the Haitian earthquake occured in 2010 — ed]

…. or

(C)

the Attorney General finds that there exist extraordinary and temporary conditions in the foreign state that prevent aliens who are nationals of the state from returning to the state in safety, unless the Attorney General finds that permitting the aliens to remain temporarily in the United States is contrary to the national interest of the United States. [bolding added]

…

(2) Effective period of designation for foreign statesThe designation of a foreign state (or part of such foreign state) under paragraph …

(B) shall remain in effect until the effective date of the termination of the designation under paragraph (3)(B).

For purposes of this section, the initial period of designation of a foreign state (or part thereof) under paragraph (1) is the period, specified by the Attorney General, of not less than 6 months and not more than 18 months.

(3) Periodic review, terminations, and extensions of designations

(A) Periodic review

At least 60 days before end of the initial period of designation, and any extended period of designation, of a foreign state (or part thereof) under this section the Attorney General, after consultation with appropriate agencies of the Government, shall review the conditions in the foreign state (or part of such foreign state) for which a designation is in effect under this subsection and shall determine whether the conditions for such designation under this subsection continue to be met. The Attorney General shall provide on a timely basis for the publication of notice of each such determination (including the basis for the determination, and, in the case of an affirmative determination, the period of extension of designation under subparagraph (C)) in the Federal Register.

(B) Termination of designation

If the Attorney General determines under subparagraph (A) that a foreign state (or part of such foreign state) no longer continues to meet the conditions for designation under paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall [emphasis added] terminate the designation by publishing notice in the Federal Register of the determination under this subparagraph (including the basis for the determination). Such termination is effective in accordance with subsection (d)(3), but shall not be effective earlier than 60 days after the date the notice is published or, if later, the expiration of the most recent previous extension under subparagraph (C).

(C) Extension of designation

If the Attorney General does not determine under subparagraph (A) that a foreign state (or part of such foreign state) no longer meets the conditions for designation under paragraph (1), the period of designation of the foreign state is extended for an additional period of 6 months (or, in the discretion of the Attorney General, a period of 12 or 18 months).

(5) Review

(A) Designations

There is no judicial review of any determination of the Attorney General with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state under this subsection.

((g) Exclusive remedy

Except as otherwise specifically provided, this section shall constitute the exclusive authority of the Attorney General under law to permit aliens who are or may become otherwise deportable or have been paroled into the United States to remain in the United States temporarily because of their particular nationality or region of foreign state of nationality.

UPDATE. Let’s hear it for RINOs!

Indiana Lt. Governor’s MASSIVE Haitian Relocation Brag Backfires, Comments Nuked After X Roasts Him

Yesterday, the Indiana Lt. Governor took to X to brag about relocating tens of thousands of Haitians to his state. He went on and on about what great Americans they will be and how they just want to work and be very patriotic. Maybe they do, but how exactly does he know that. It didn't go well for him. Soon enough, he had to turn off the comments. Read the room, dude. 

There are none so blind as those who will not see

/

7 Jones Park Drive in Riverside has been on the market since January 22nd, priced at $5.995 with nary a waver from that demand. Until yesterday, when the price was finally cut a whopping $200,000 to $5.795. Houses all over town, but especially in Riverside, are selling in days or, at worst, weeks, but not in months. Here is a list of 21 houses in Riverside in this general price range, all of which went to contract this year:

Most, if not all 21 of those buyers must have looked at 7 Jones Park and rejected it in favor of another. Understand, I’m not saying anything bad about this house — I haven’t seen it — but the market certainly is. In fact, if a house on this, one of the best streets and neighborhoods in Riverside, hasn’t budged in nine months, that’s no mere muttering of disapproval, it’s a full-blown holler. And the fault surely lies not in the stars, but the price.

The listing agent here is Ellen Mosher, and there isn’t a better or more experienced agent in Greenwich; she must be tearing her hair out over these owner’s stubborn intransigence.

Two Friday closings that snuck in under the wire

/

10 Old Forge Road, listed on Friday, July 18th for $2.395 million, closed the bidding Monday, July 21st at noon, and was sold yesterday for $2.960; they didn’t even have time to jack up the main structure to make it level with the garage.

The owners of 98 Hunting Ridge Road paid $2.3 million for it in March ‘24 in a bidding war that began at $2.250. They made some minor improvements and stuck it back on the market this January 11th at $2.950. Although that proved overly optimistic, they did sell it for $2.7 yesterday, so they probably made out just fine.

Paper overing the problem and its cause

/

Portland [Maine] Commercial Property Owners Will Soon Face Fines for Vacant Storefronts Unless They Allow the City to Display Art

The Portland City Council has voted to penalize commercial property owners if storefronts are vacant for over six months unless they agree to allow the City to bring in temporary art installations.

Fines for empty storefronts will range from $500 to more than $7,500, depending upon how long the space has gone without housing a business.

The $250 fine would be levied for commercial spaces left vacant between six months and a year, while spaces empty for ten years would be hits with a $7,500 fine. Every year beyond that would increase the fine by $1,000.

Property owners may, however, obtain a waiver allowing them to leave their properties vacant for an extended period of time without being assessed a fine.

In order to obtain one of these waivers, a commercial property owner must agree to allow the City to set up a temporary art installation in any visible area of the vacant space, including in the exterior windows.

Waivers may also be granted by the City if there are extenuating circumstances preventing a space from being occupied for an extended period of time.

To enforce these new requirements, commercial property owners must register vacant spaces with Portland’s Housing and Economic Development Department within thirty days.

This registry of vacant commercial properties will be made publicly available on the City’s website and will be updated at least once every three months.

Included in this registry will be information about the approved use of each vacant space, as well as the layout, reason for the vacancy, desired rent amount, and the owner’s contact information.

[“Desired rent amount” — I guarantee you that the next move by the communists controlling the City Council will be to extend the current residential rent control ordinance to commercial properties —ed]

According to WMTW, Portland City Councilor Kate Sykes views the proposal as a “win-win” because the City is either able to “charge to not basically make the storefront look like it’s empty; otherwise, you get free artwork.”

“The goal here is to make it a livable and vibrant place, not to hurt or bring down or burden any business in any way or any property owner,” Portland City Councilor Sarah Michniewicz said, according to Fox 23 Maine.

But here’s the (due to be wallpapered) elephant in the room:

This opinion, however, is not shared by everyone in Portland, as some have suggested that vacancies occur due to safety concerns.

“You can have Picassos in that window, and it will not change the tenor of the problems on that intersection,” said resident George Rowe.

Although Portland Mayor Mark Dion said that he believes the new program will help to improve safety [he doesn’t say how — ed] he still voted against the proposal in light of the experiences shared by business owners in the City.

“I have to stand up for the idea that the commercial brokers try to tell you something about their experience in that market,” said Mayor Dion.

“If we refurbish a storefront and someone is passed out on the sidewalk with a needle in their arm, I don’t know what we have accomplished,” Dion said. “You could have the best Picasso in the window, and it’s not going to deter that kind of conduct.”

“I don’t know a commercial real estate owner that doesn’t want their space filled,” Portland resident Bev Uhlenhake said. “They’re not not filling their spaces because they don’t want to, it’s because they can’t, and we need to fix the problem.”

I wrote about this issue back in April

Why do our compassionate liberal friends ruin every city they occupy?

Not very long ago, Portland Maine was a clean, safe little city of 60,000 souls, with beautiful parks, a vibrant commercial waterfront and some great restaurants. All that beauty attracted young people and middle-aged yuppies from Boston, and they promptly set about remaking the city into their image of a liberal/socialist paradise. They succeeded only partly: liberal/socialist, yes; paradise, no.

Here’s the latest dispatch from the battlefield:

Portland’s Monument Square in Crisis: Business Owners, Residents Demand City Action on Homelessness and Rampant Drug Use

Portland residents and business owners are speaking out and asking the City Council for help to address what they say are unsafe and obstructive conditions in Monument Square caused by the presence of homeless people and drug users.

A letter to Portland Mayor Mark Dion from David Turin, the owner of David’s Restaurant [one of the best, and priciest restaurants in Portland — Ed] in Monument Square, was read during the public comment portion at the City Council’s Monday meeting.

“Monument Square has become an unsafe place to work or visit, and has become a hostile and expensive environment in which to operate a restaurant,” Turin wrote.

[RELATED: Restorative Justice: Homeless Man, Previously Charged with Portland Machete and Knife Attacks, Arrested Again for Assault, Burglary…]

Turin … wrote that his employees have had their cars broken into six times in the last month, and have seen over a hundred instances both of littering and open drug use in front of his restaurant.

“Dining guests and staff are frequently abused and sometimes threatened,” Turin wrote. “We have had our front windows smashed twice in two years.”

“The square has long been a desirable destination for strolling, sitting outside, shopping, doing business and dining — now it looks like an encampment of some kind,” he wrote.

Turin said that the homelessness issue in the square is an “existential crisis and threat” to his business and other businesses in the area. “Please help us,” he ends his letter.

Ari Gerson, owner of Longfellow Books near Monument Square, also spoke on the issue of homelessness and public safety in the area during the Monday City Council meeting.

“Over the past year, we’ve seen a sharp increase in drug use, aggressive panhandling, and confrontational behavior right outside our front doors,” Gerson told the Council.

“We’ve found needles and drug paraphernalia in the planters and the sidewalk cracks,” Gerson said. “There are people passed out, clearly in distress, and sometimes frightening episodes of shouting or violence that scares off customers, staff and even myself at times.”

[RELATED: Longtime Bayside Resident Says She was Victim of Brutal Mugging, Warns Women not to Walk Alone in Neighborhood…]

Several Monument Square neighborhood residents also spoke at the meeting and voiced similar concerns to the business owners.

“I have become frightened in my own neighborhood to go outside my own door, and to face the things that we are facing at this point,” one female resident said.

“Almost everyday when I leave my house I have to knock on my door, because someone is using in front of my door,” another woman said. “I’ve come home often to defecation or urine on the ground outside of my house.”

“When you call the police, they come, but it’s hard to offer any help,” she said.

“When I go home, or try to leave, and I have to wake somebody up or move them to get in or out of my front door, that’s not very comfortable,” another woman said.

Several of the speakers called for increased police presence and intervention in the Monument Square area, as well as for the city to direct more resources into shelters and support services for the homeless.

So the City Council’s response to these complaints and cries of alarm from the citizens who keep the city going? “Hey kids, let’s put on a show!”