Opinion

3/20 Letters: As gentrification spreads, where will Durham residents go?

‘I guess I’ve been gentrified,’ says Durham renter

Rosemary and John Abram live on a fixed income. Their apartment building on Morehead Ave. in Durham, NC was sold to a company in Texas in 2017. On April 1, 2018 they were given 30 days to vacate or apply for a renovated, more expensive unit.
Up Next
Rosemary and John Abram live on a fixed income. Their apartment building on Morehead Ave. in Durham, NC was sold to a company in Texas in 2017. On April 1, 2018 they were given 30 days to vacate or apply for a renovated, more expensive unit.

Lost neighborhoods

I believe the African American community has taken another hit. I am speaking about those people who trying to live on disability, minimum wage, work first, unemployment or no income at all.

A few decades ago, a vibrant community called Hayti was razed. When members of that community get together, most of us couldn’t come up with a viable reason. First the freeway was put down the middle of Hayti. A lot of people lost their homes and businesses. Some never recovered. Then, urban renewal came in and relocated everyone else.

Hayti was a working-class community. My parents lived, worked and raised their family there. There was an air of pride in the way people carried themselves and conducted their business. If this was a poor community, I don’t think they knew it. They never showed that to us. We were a strong and proud people.

Now, the south side of Durham is experiencing a new remodeling on many of the streets we played on as children. I was told that this project is called gentrification. This is the process of renewal accompanying the influx of middle-class people into deteriorating areas that often displaces earlier, poorer residents. Is gentrification a modern way of saying urban renewal? Where will the former residents be relocated?

Brenda James

Durham

Individual accountability

In reference to the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling that Remington could be sued. I have never seen an ad by Remington or any other firearms manufacturer marketing their products to mentally ill individuals or encouraging the use of their firearms to harm or kill innocent people. To even insinuate that is ridiculous!

As far as firearms being used to kill or injure innocent people, which is deplorable, how about other items in our society that have also been used to kill or injure innocent people — like vehicles that cause accidents due to alcohol or cell phone use or knives used to kill or mutilate. Why not sue those manufacturers that make the vehicles, knives, cell phones and alcohol? You won’t, because you want those products even if they do cause deaths in the wrong hands.

When are we going to hold the individuals accountable, not the object used? The individual is the problem — always has been.

Paul L. Powell, Jr.

Siler City

Open hearts?

There ought to be an eleventh commandment: Thou shalt not form an opinion on any subject without first learning the facts about it.

In searching for the truth, I learned my beloved United Methodist Church was as ignorant as I. Turn to the Church’s Book of Discipline’s section on homosexuality. You will find very little love and understanding. I kept waiting and praying that enlightenment would come to my beloved church.

This is the year I give up. I can no longer support a church which can’t agree with John Shelby Spong in his book, The Bishop’s Voice, “gay and lesbian people are not heterosexual people who, because of their moral depravity, have chosen to live sinful homosexual lives. They are simply people born with a different sexual orientation who have been inaccurately defined as abnormal and condemned as immoral by an ignorant heterosexual majority.”

At least take down those untrue signs with “Open Hearts and Open Minds” on them.

Myrl M McCotter

Morehead City

Unequal application?

So, President Trump paid no taxes (apparently). His businesses are still open, and he’s eating high on the hog. The owners of Wilber’s paid no tax, were forced to close, and we can’t eat any hog. Is there something wrong with this picture?

Albert Coffey

Wake Forest

Protect the wolves

Before the Endangered Species Act (ESA), gray wolves nearly went extinct. The Interior Department’s current plan to take wolves off the endangered list in the lower 48 states could be a death sentence for this vital species. Hunting, trapping and poisoning nearly drove wolves to extinction in the 1900s. Without the proven protection of the ESA, we could see a repeat of last century´s tragedy. As few as 5,600 wolves live in the continental U.S. today, scattered throughout just 15 percent of their former range.

The Endangered Species Act is a proven success: 99 percent of the species it protects are still with us today. Now the act itself is endangered by the machinations of the occupant of the White House.

The ESA must continue the protections that have returned wolves to the wild. Delisting this alpha-predator can only harm the ecological balance of its diverse habitats. We must continue protect wolves and its habitats.

Mae Basye

Fuquay Varina

  Comments