Our Time PressThe Local Paper with the Global View

40 Women, 40 Years of Philanthropyby Darrion J. Beckles
Brooklyn, New York- When the phrase 40/40 is mentioned aloud, you may envision the swag social venue in Midtown Manhattan, run by the famous rap mogul – that‘s not the case in Bedford Stuyvesant.  Forty/forty now brings about thoughts of activism, philanthropy, feminism.  Forty years, forty women.

Forty, in the first instance, is a reference to the fortieth anniversary of Hattie Carthan’s 1960’s eco-cause becoming a neighborhood fixture- the Magnolia Tree Earth Center.

Last month, at a Von King Park celebration it represented also the remarkable determination — years of duty — by forty remarkable women philanthropists, who through their tenacity and hard work, are improving their communities forty-fold, women who, like the late Hattie Carthan, show love to their community through endless hours of activism and community service.
On Monday, March 29th, community legends like Mary Von King (activist and the wife of the park’s late namesake, Herbert Von King), Mama Leah, Mother Olatunji, and Alma Duke Carroll, as well as thirty six other queens on the community activist front were “immortalized” on the theater’s wall of living legends> And deservedly so.

They nurtured their neighborhoods with care and attention, and for that, before an audience of loved ones and supporters, they were honored.   The event, Von King Park’s 2nd Annual Women’s History Month Awards and Hattie Carthan award ceremony saluted sisters, mothers, wives, co-workers and friends. Two days before women’s history month came to a close, teachers, principals, executives, gardeners, council representatives, non profit women, corporate women, and community activists came from near and far to cheer and celebrate in “You Go, Girl” fashion. Broadcaster Ann Tripp delivered of New York soul station WBLS delivered a beautiful keynote urging women to be at the forefront of delivering messages of activism for a better earth.  It was an event prepared for the seasoned activists, but was powered by the spry enthusiasm of the future philanthropists. The youngsters weren’t just there to observe; they were involved.  Preparing a scrumptious brunch buffet for all of the award winners and guests, and entertaining the audience with a five course serving of spoken word doesn’t even begin to describe their level contribution.

Recipients and organizers sang praises for the youngsters, who that day, dispelled the stereotype of the aimless -minority- youth.  Honoree Carroll, community organizer, said she believes in the important of keeping the lines of communication between young folks open -and strong- with those who have been there before. There was a broad consensus in Von King Park’s Eubie Blake Theater that the torch, when passed, will be in capable hands, athlete Mary deSaussere told us.  They have proven themselves.  “Give them guidance, structure, and nurturing, you’ll have a solid foundation,” said ten -year volunteer and event organizer Charlotte Renee Mial, who was given one of the highest honors of the afternoon for her own work with the youth as head of the Culinary Arts Program..

In addition to the 40 women being awarded, four of Bedford Stuyvesant history’s most revered women were given high honors and acknowledgements:  education activist Almira Coursey, neighborhood and brownstone preservationist Ruby Ford, the Honorable Lucille Rose, the city’s first black woman Judge, and community icon and larger than life Brooklyn legend Hattie Carthan, the environmentalist.   Sidney Moshette accepted for the late Almira Coursey and announced there’s talk in the air of naming the Von King park ampitheater after Mrs. Coursey.  The award was named appropriately after one of Brooklyn’s toughest activists.   In Hattie Carthan’s day activism was as simple as taking action when your favorite tree is being threatened.  Many of these ladies were born and raised in a time of fire hoses, segregation, lynching, cross burnings, and segregation- America‘s apartheid era.  Every woman receiving the award sees Mrs. Carthan as a shining example.  She was the woman who planted the seed that allowed them to grow as community leaders, so it was an honor for them to know that they were following in the footsteps of one of the village’s greatest, most active philanthropists.    Lois Alma Gilliard, known throughout Brooklyn as Mama Leah, is a volunteer arts instructor, civil rights solider and community matriarch. She offered words of wisdom for the future forty as the crowd filed out of the auditorium: “The women that are here will just not sit back now; they will let this be an opportunity to be energized and refueled and not necessarily view anything different than what they have been doing.”
The event was about giving back to the community.  And that is what the creative mind behind the event, Charlotte Mial, did by organizing and composing the day.  It was her idea to involve the youth in the event preparations in celebration of the community heroes.  Recreation specialist Larry Banks, a composer and drama coach, and Center Manager Lemuel Mial recorded Banks’ original song, “Woman,” for the honorees; and John Llanos, a former archaeologist,  created -by hand- 40 vases without even the thought of credit or compensation. Both the CD’s and hand-signed Vases were available in gift bags, along with copies of March Essence Magazine and Vogue’s now historic issue with First Lady Michelle Obama on the cover. The givers received their just due from those who cherish and appreciate giving.

The atmosphere of the day was full of hope, enthusiasm, gratitude, excitement, pride and positive energy.  There was a subtle electricity in the air as recipients, guests, friends, families, supporters, and observers put it to a greater power in speech and in prayer for another forty years of excellence from the women of Brooklyn.  But as one of the award winners exclaimed before and after the stage was cleared, “if it aint in ya, then it cant come out.”The spirits of Hattie Carthan and Mr. Von King watched on, with a smile, with confidence, seeing their work gave birth to something wonderful.   (Darrion Beckles is a Brooklyn-based writer and community news reporter. He can be reached at  warriorscribe@gmail.com )

After a few moments passed by, several white males walked into the room and examined their    anatomy.  In many cases, the examination of these human specimens leads to much debate over who is promised to receive the next available Black or Hispanic person to work the field.  On some occasions the white males would attempt to lure the men of color by telling them that they would be under better conditions if they were placed in their care.  After the man or woman is picked, they are then put out in the field to carry out the difficult and extremely dangerous job that they were chosen for.  In many cases they are seriously injured and sometimes they lose their lives. 
Although those who are responsible for them are aware of the hazards that are associated with their tasks, little is done to ensure their safety or correct the conditions that cause their harm.  For all practical purposes, the actions of those who put them in this circumstance indicates that these Blacks and Hispanics are dispensable.  
The scenario that was just laid out is not a rendition of a slave auction taking place during the 1800s.  It is instead the cruel and sad plight that plagues the daily life of  Blacks and Hispanics who perform undercover work for the New York City Police Department.  This climate contributes to many of the serious injuries and sometimes death of undercover officers.  The answer to how and why this 21st-century slavelike condition still exists could only be understood by taking a close look at the job of an undercover officer. 
In many cases the initiative to become an undercover officer has much to do with how career advancement is carried out in the American law enforcement community.  New York City is only one example of what takes place in all of our nation=s police agencies.  There are two primary tracks an officer could take to advance through the ranks of law enforcement. One way is to take a promotional examination to become a supervisor and the other is to following the investigator route, which leads to becoming a detective.
If a police officer decides to take the detective route to advancement, he would be assigned to one of the police departments many investigator units. 
Out of the list of units he could be assigned to, the two most dangerous are those that require officers to work undercover to rid our communities of guns and drugs.  It is in these two assignments that American police agencies= dark racist secret is lived out. 
There are three ways that a police officer can be assigned to one of these two units. He could be either a supervisor, an investigator or an undercover.
Out of the three positions it is the role as an undercover that is the most dangerous.  That officer is responsible for being in close proximity with the often-armed drug or gun dealer.  Eighty to ninety percent of the officers who are assigned to be undercovers are either Black or Hispanic, while the opposite is true for those who are assigned as supervisors or investigators. 
It leads many to ask why don=t Blacks and Hispanic apply for an investigator position in these units or choose one of the less dangerous detective path assignments.  The answer lies in the racist actions of the police department.
 When Blacks and Hispanics attempt to choose other assignments they are told that all that is available is the role as an undercover.  
During the interviews process for entry into the two units that buy guns or drugs,   supervisors fight over having the Black or Hispanic officer work the streets for them reminiscing of how plantation owners bid on a newly arrived slave buck. 
Not only is the assignment of an undercover extremely dangerous, they also work under correctable hazardous conditions. Under humane conditions an officer should not spend more than three years being an undercover.  Although this recommendation was put in place by the police department, many undercovers are buying drugs or guns well over these number of years.  They also are forced to continually purchase  guns or drugs in the same areas where they have been already identified as being police officers.  This increases the risk of being injured.
Another area of danger is the listening device that is used by the undercover to call for help when an assignment has gone bad.  Although modern technology has produced several technological advancements in improving communication, the police department has not made these improvements available to the dangerous assignment of undercovers.  On far too many occasions an undercover=s calls for help is not heard.  This leads to serious assaults and some cases possible death. 

The police department justifies their assignment of Blacks and Hispanics to the dangerous assignment of undercovers by stating that only this group can successfully infiltrate  the illegal world of dealers of drugs and guns.  This reasoning is a terrible indication of the imbedded racism in how police agencies fight crime.  Although a successful undercover operation is welcomed in communities of color, the small amounts of drugs and guns that are recovered are only the tip of the iceberg of what is possessed in affluent communities.  If there are no undercover operations taking place in all areas of the city then the police department is ignoring a large portion of criminal behavior.  FBI stats have long shown that drugs are used just as much in white areas of the city as in communities of color.
In addition, some of the less dangerous undercover assignments such as Vice enforcement,  which includes gambling and prostitution, takes place in Black and Hispanic communities.  Yet, the overwhelming numbers of officers assigned to these units are whites.  In many cases when Black female officers are assigned to units such as the Vice unit, they only remain there for three months to be decoy prostitutes.  After the three months are up they send them back to uniform assignments to avoid having to promote them to detectives. 
Because police work has an inherit amount of danger associated to it, it is imperative that the nation=s police agencies do all that they could to alleviate harm to officers assigned to protect us.   The concern for this must be ensured for all men and women in law enforcement, including Black and Hispanic officers.

Members of the Legal Services Staff Association (LSSA) with support from members of other UAW locals will picket their employer, Legal Services-NYC, an Thursday, April 2lst at 5:30pm in front of its main office located at 350 Broadway (6etween Franklin and Leonard Streets) prior to the meeting of the Board of Directors of LS-NYC.  Members are protesting the firing of Bill Henderson, longtime union representative and Senior Attorney at Bedford-Stuyvesant Community Legal Services. Mr. Henderson was fired after numerous acts of retaliation against him by Victor Olds, the director of this Long- troubled program.
Since Mr. Olds was hired in March 2007 all but one attorney, including managers, have left the program leaving only one experienced attorney on staff to serve a community with one of the most concentrated poor populations in New York City. Mr, Henderson, a family law attorney with over 20 years of experience, was the target of numerous adverse actions by Mr Olds which lead to the filing of pending Unfair Labor Practice charges with the NLRB and grievances pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Agreement between LS-NYC and LSSA. LS-NYC Executive Director Andrew Scherer summarily denied each of the grievances which now must be decided by an arbitrator.

LSSA President Gibb Surette said “It is outrageous that LS-NYC management has engaged in an anti-union campaign at Bed-Stuy Legal Services further depriving this community of desperately needed services in these harsh economic times.”

It happens all the time. A thirsty consumer grabs a cup of coffee with a debit card, unknowingly exceeds the available balance, and gets smacked with a $30 fee for the $3 purchase.
The banks call it overdraft protection – the usually automatic loan fronted by institutions to cover purchases even when checking accounts have run dry. And they consider it a service to customers. But critics argue that the industry has adopted a slew of abusive tactics to maximize the frequency of these loans – and the considerable fees that accompany them.
Now, as Congress is preparing to tackle a series of proposals tightening oversight and regulation of the finance industry, a growing chorus of lawmakers and consumer groups is urging Democratic leaders to include overdraft reform as a part of the package. In an economy where taxpayers have already bailed out Wall Street banks to the tune of billions of dollars, they argue, those institutions shouldn’t be permitted to turn around and slap abusive fees on their rescuers.
“They’re taking the TARP funds and then they’re raising fees and rates on the same people who funded TARP,” Pam Banks, policy counsel at Consumers Union, said of the banks benefiting from the Troubled Asset Relief Program. “They’re double dipping with the taxpayers’ money.”
But reform won’t come easy. Overdraft fees are a whirling profit engine for banks, and the industry is fighting tooth and nail to keep Congress at bay. Indeed, in a report released last November, the Federal Deposit Insurance  Corporation found that overdraft fees range from $10 to $38, with a median charge of $27.
And those fees add up. A 2007 report from the Center for Responsible Lending found that overdraft fees bring in roughly $17.5 billion each year – more than the estimated $15.8 billion in overdraft loans that generated them. Industry representatives maintain that overdraft protections are designed to benefit customers. “In general, people do appreciate and value this service,” said Nessa Feddis, spokeswoman for the American Bankers Association. She said that consumers can easily avoid trouble by keeping track of balances, maintaining a balance cushion or opting into programs where the debit account is linked to a second account or a line of credit to absorb the overdraft. “There are all sorts of ways to to avoid it,” Feddis said. Critics argue, however, that many of the industry’s practices hit below the belt. Among the most controversial, most banks automatically enroll customers in the overdraft protection program, without their knowledge or consent. Also, most institutions manipulate the order of purchases, often increasing the number of overdraft transactions. And there is no system in place warning shoppers when they’re poised to buy something that will send them into overdraft territory.
A House bill, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), takes steps to protect consumers on all three fronts – but the bill faces a tough road ahead.
Despite wide agreement that the finance industry is largely responsible for the current economic mess, it retains enormous sway on Capitol Hill, where  controversial housing legislation has stalled already this year in the face of industry opposition. Furthermore, Congress has spent hundreds of billions on the banks in recent months, hoping they’ll re-grease the economy by increasing  ending. In the wake of those efforts, many lawmakers will likely be reluctant to support legislation that could hurt industry profits, even if those reforms protect consumers. Such proposals will likely be spun as undermining bailout efforts.
Graham Steele, an attorney at Public Citizen’s Congress Watch, said many lawmakers are “spooked by the apocalyptic messaging” of the banking lobby. “They seem to still have traction on Capitol Hill, unfortunately,” Steele said. The debate highlights the difficulty facing lawmakers pushing to reform the powerful finance industry: In good economic times, there’s a tendency in Washington to stay out of the affairs of banks for fear of impeding an economic engine; in bad economic times, there’s a tendency to stay out of their way for fear of hindering recovery. Ironically, the  current economic chaos might make it more difficult for proponents of finance reforms to rally the congressional support to pass the proposed changes.
On Tuesday, Bank of America made headlines by scrapping plans to hike its overdraft fees from $35 to $39 per transaction. BoA spokesman Jim Pierpoint said the decision was made in consideration of the troubled economy, particularly the rising rate of unemployment. The company is also working on a case-by-case basis with newly unemployed customers to review overdrafts, he said. Yet two other
recent BoA policy changes – one applying a $35 fee if a customer’s balance is negative for five days, and another hiking allowable overdraft fees at 10 per day, up from seven – will remain in place, Pierpoint said.
Faced with declining revenues, other banks are also tightening the belt on consumer benefits – adopting new fees and reducing borrowers’ limits.
Some Democrats aren’t holding their breath for the banking industry to volunteer overdraft reforms. The Maloney bill would prohibit automatic enrollment in a bank’s overdraft protection program, instead requiring the customer to opt-in to participate. It would also alert debit card users at the ATM or the coffee counter if they were about to exceed their balance, allowing the shopper to opt-out of the purchase to avoid the penalty fee. Finally, the bill would prohibit any reordering of purchases that leads to an increase in overdrafts.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has vowed in coming weeks to take up a series of finance reform bills, including proposals to reform the credit card and mortgage lending industries. Frank spokesman Steven Adamske said Tuesday that overdraft reform is on Frank’s radar, but it remains uncertain if or when the committee would consider the legislation this year.
There is no companion to the Maloney bill in the Senate.
Of the various industry tactics, the resequencing of transactions to maximize overdrafts is perhaps the most obscure. In a hypothetical case,
a card-user with $100 in available funds might buy a $75 sweater, a $2 cup of coffee, a $4 hamburger and $30 worth of groceries – going over the limit only on the final purchase. But banks often tally each day’s transactions by order of the purchase amount – largest to smallest – not by chronology. In this example, the consumer would exceed the limit after just the two largest purchases ($75 + $30 = $105), and thus be hit
with overdraft fees on the two smaller purchases as well. The result? The bank gets three overdraft fees ($81) instead of just one ($27).
Feddis, said that tactic is precisely what customers want, arguing that the the most vital purchases tend to be the most expensive. “People want their important expenses paid,” she said.
Maloney’s office, though, isn’t buying the argument. “Whether it’s by design or innocent, its effect is to incur more fees,” said Maloney
spokesman Jon Houston. “They’re using this as a profit center.”
The Federal Reserve has taken recent steps to protect consumers from overdraft fees as well. In December, the Fed proposed two strategies to give customers more options surrounding overdraft payments. The first would prohibit banks from charging overdraft fees on purchases already made without first giving consumers the choice to opt-out of the program. The second is an opt-in approach, requiring specific consent from the customer before banks could authorize overdraft purchases at all. The final rule is expected before the end of the year.
The Fed’s action could easily be the only overdraft reforms of 2009. Faced with the imposing opposition of the finance industry, some
observers say, Congress won’t likely get very far with its finance reform agenda this year. “I . can’t think of another sector that has proven itself so adept over the years at blocking even minor reforms,” Stephen Pearlstein, the Pulizer Prize winning business columnist for The Washington Post wrote Wednesday. “With so many conflicting interests among well-heeled firms and so many agencies fighting to protect their bureaucratic turf, the most likely outcome is political stalemate. “Watching the Senate Banking Committee deal with financial regulation,”
Pearlstein added, “is a bit like watching a cow chew its cud.”

By Amadi Ajamu

<PMTags1.0 win><C-COLORTABLE (“Black” 1 0 0 0)><GFIRST 18><GALIGNMENT “justify”><FONT
 “Times New Roman”><SIZE 10><GTABS $>  The follow up to the World Conference against Racism (WCAR) 2001 and the Durban Declaration dubbed “Durban Review” will be held in Geneva, Switzerland, April 20 – 24, 2009. The December 12th Movement International Secretariat, a non governmental organization (NGO) with consultative status to the United Nations, will lead the “Durban 400” delegation and defend Black peoples’ right to reparations for slavery.
The follow up to the World Conference against Racism (WCAR) 2001 and the Durban Declaration dubbed “Durban Review” will be held in Geneva, Switzerland, April 20 – 24, 2009. The December 12th Movement International Secretariat, a non governmental organization (NGO) with consultative status to the United Nations, will lead the “Durban 400” delegation and defend Black peoples’ right to reparations for slavery.

Member nations attending the first WCAR held in September 2001 in Durban, South Africa, declared “…that slavery and the slave trade are a crime against humanity and should always have been so, especially the transatlantic slave trade.” Attorney Roger Wareham states, “Today, the United States government, which walked out on the Durban conference, and Europe are vying to reverse these correct verdicts because they would be the principal payers of the reparations debt.”
A City – Wide Send Off Rally was held on Monday, April 13, 2009 at 6:30 PM at the National Black Theater, 2051 5th Avenue (off 125th Street), Harlem, New York. Speakers included, Viola Plummer of the December 12th Movement, Dr. James McIntosh of CEMOTAP, Black Radio personality Bob Law, Attorney Esmeralda Simmons of the Center for Law and Social Justice, and Abdul Hafeez Muhammad of the Nation of Islam, Dr. Leonard Jefferies, Chaka cousin of the All African Peoples’ Revolutionary Party.
There was also a special video presentation of the “Durban 400” documentary of the December 12th Movement and National Black United Front’s lobbying efforts at the WCAR in Durban, South Africa.