The Bird House: A New Breed Of Urban Activists

The Bird House: A New Breed Of Urban Activists

Story Options

Just yesterday I received the following cryptic email:

After three years of ā€˜squatting’ there, an environmentalist collective calling themselves the "Bird House" have acquired a deed to their property. We would like to raise public support for the resurgence of this communal living situation and community garden. If you're interested, feel free to call 716-491-7474 and speak with me, Tim Robson, for more info. Thanks again.

I sat back and read over the email again. What house? An environmentalist collective? Squatting? The Bird House? I picked up the phone and dialed the number. It was Tim who answered, and he told me that he was busy at Home Depot picking up tools that he needed to repair the house... he would call back. An hour later the phone rang... he was ready to talk. It turns out that Tim has been fighting a battle to claim possession of a 100 year old Victorian mansion on the city's West Side. Along the way, he and a group of friends (who inhabit the house) have dealt with an out-of-town landlord... and are now dealing with an out-of-town bank (and a lean on the property). Here's Tim's story:

"Three years ago myself and friends discovered the ideal place to live. The house was totally stripped and scrapped apart, but the structure was still sound. Five of us moved into the house... we lived there for three years. Over that time period we took multiple visits to Housing Court to attempt to get a hold of the ownership. We figured that if we were the owners, then we could fix it up instead of watching it deteriorate year after year. Finally we were evicted this past July (presumably for stirring up trouble for the out-of-town-landlord). Even after we were evicted we continued to follow up with housing court dates. Eventually Housing Court (Judge Nowak) went after the owner.

"As of November 20th 2007 I finally managed to secure ownership of the deed... and now we are rebuilding the house. There's even an old in-ground pool in the backyard that we’ve converted into a garden. We’ve smashed out the concrete patio on the side and that is also going to be a garden. Many of the vegetables that we eat are grown in these gardens, and we all share responsibility for maintaining the plants and vegetables. We even have a communal van… it’s shared between six people who live in the city. We have a bike shop in the basement where we assemble and repair bikes… never anything too formal. We’ve also worked with the Blue Bike sharing program. And the house has a music practice space that is heated by a wood stove.

"We’re not an official cooperative… we’re more of an organic group… an informal cooperative. We share living responsibilities and we share rent… the remainder of the monthly fee goes toward the collective pot. Bills are all split up. After the eviction we thought that we were done for. We’re really excited to be here… come April we should have between six and ten people living here. We’re even trying to acquire a lot down the street to turn it into a community garden like Pat Cain did... we need more space where we can grow our food. Our group recently brought a screen-press into the house and we’re going to start a small operation where we make t-shirts and flyers for local bands. Hopefully those proceeds will help to grow some of the other self-sustaining projects. We even got the bank in Houston to drop the lean on the house from $60,000 to $15,000… we are working to get it to zero. We want to talk to Judge Nowak about this bank being a poor property owner since the owner finally gave up on the house. We want a clean slate to create a high-energy creative space that provides to make the world more beautiful. I’ve noticed a real pick-up in Buffalo over the last couple of years… it’s nice to be part of the movement."

Tim wants people in Buffalo to know that if they want to get involved with this new kind of movement... if they believe in what he is doing, then they should feel free to call him 716-491-7474.

Rock Harbor

What Others Have To Say

  1. ChocolateShake

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 08:42

    An environmentalist collective? A communal living situation? Its nice that these former abandoned homes have found a new life, yet, the people behind this sound kind of scary.

    [deleted: inflammatory]

  2. LivingForge

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 08:53

    Scary? They're getting s*** done.

  3. buffalostan

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:12

    Is this a cult of some sort? I don't think I would like them living in my neighborhood, when they are equated with the Manson family I find it shocking. Do they have religious beliefs of some sort I cannot elucidate that information from the contents of the article.

  4. KernwatchMN

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:18

    Where is the house? It appears to be Bird Ave at West Ave? If so, there are many city-owned vacant lots nearby that should be leasable from the city in return for maintaining them as gardens.

  5. ChocolateShake

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:28

    LivingForge,

    You are right that they are doing something to the neighborhood. I should be neighborly and invite them over to one of my famous fossil fuel dinner parties.

  6. Lizliz

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:37

    "Is this a cult of some sort? I don't think I would like them living in my neighborhood, when they are equated with the Manson family I find it shocking. Do they have religious beliefs of some sort I cannot elucidate that information from the contents of the article."

    Buffalostan -- please don't be afraid -- Just because one random commenter mentions the Manson Family doesn't mean there's anything sinister going on. I've known squatters in NYC and they're just normal people, usually of limited means, who want a place of their own. It sounds like they're working to fix up and abandoned house, which is admirable in Buffalo.

  7. NSphere

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:42

    I think it sounds great that they're working on improving the place but I've heard some skeevy things about the place. I personally haven't stayed there so I'm not gong to knock them, I'm just saying this article isn't everything I've heard about the "Bird House."

    And its lien not lean. A lien is security interest over a property until some sort of contractual obligation is completed.

  8. Sullymon54

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:49

    I live on Bird about 2 blocks from this house and pass by it everyday and in doing so I had seen that there were a group of lets just say colorful people that lived there. What was I found less than surprising was that one day the house was all boarded up and the colorful people were gone, I had figured that the city or who ever got rid of some squatters. I'm semi torn on this issue, on one hand these people are at the very least making use of a vacant property however I would say that its a less than ideal situation from the perspective of property owners in the neighborhood.

  9. ChocolateShake

    6 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:51

    LizLiz, squatters in NYC aren't known for forming "environmental collectives." Moreover, the squatters that have formed a "communal living situation" have done so for crazy religious or political reasons (i.e. the Weathermen). The "Bird House" sounds like an organized group with a clear political motives.

    Do you not recall the Tompkins Square riots? The squatters that caused that turmoil had sinister motives. I too have known many NYC squatters and thus my concern - I lived in Alphabet City on Avenue A from 1993 until 1997.

  10. benfranklin

    7 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 09:51

    Drawing attention to themselves was the last thing they should have done. In three months they'll be someone else's problem. If you want to be part of the underground economy, it's best to remain underground. Think that property's zoned for a 'print shop'? How 'bout collecting sales tax on those brochures? Think they've got permits for all the work? I doubt it. It's all warm and fuzzy til they burn the place down/need medical help/some small kid in the neighborhood vanishes for an hour or two (not that they'd be holding the kid...but it's the first place everyones attention will go to).

    If you want to be left alone, don't give the neighbors enough ammo to do you in by dinner time. Love the line that "the remainder of the monthly fee goes toward the collective pot. " Yeah, pot. Also, "were not an official cooperative", at least he knows enough that he hasn't completed the proper paperwork in NYS to be "official". Don't we also have a law about number of nonrelatives in a home? Oh well, I'm normally the libertarian around here, but if you want the number of layers of government that this town has...well, this group hasn't got a prayer.

  11. NBJOHN

    7 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:09

    WTF? We livin' the Sixties? These people need to get a job and buy a house so we can drive up property values and keep the scum out of the city (at least the North Buffalo part of the city, I am very selfish).

  12. buffalostan

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:11

    Ben makes it very clear that these people are indeed dangerous and the police should be called. Ben have you heard actual stories of them kidnapping children in the surrounding area?

  13. NBJOHN

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:18

    Yikes... Is this the only development news of late????

    Uht oh - Economic downturn is on I guess.

  14. benfranklin

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:20

    I wrote (not that they'd be holding the kid...but it's the first place everyones attention will go to). But who'd expect you to read before commenting. I own property in the city, and while doing rehab on one project, did have these sorts get in the building. Of the three in the building, caught by the police, one had outstanding warrants for a felony. Love the way they put 'environmentalist' in their name, and you Williamsville types will eat it up. What's the difference between breaking and entering and squatting? Squatters just hang around after the initial crime. These people aren't part of the solution... how many blue bikes did you have to throw out a few summers ago? If you don't know what I'm talking about, you shouldn't comment on about these people.

  15. Texpat10

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:26

    Ben is right, Does this sound like an upstanding group of people to you? Basically, they took posession of this property by squatting so they could have someplace free to live. Do their commercial ventures sound like they are going to produce enough money to really fix this house up? No, the will just wind up being another kind of blight in the neighborhood. I had to laugh at how they are trying to make the world "more beautiful." Do band flyers make the world more beautiful?

  16. eliz

    10 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:28

    Growing their own food, riding bikes, having band practice .. and now they own the house and are trying to fix it up? I don't see anything sinister here.

    What article are people reading? It can't be the one I just read.

  17. Martin

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:32

    lol...i would love for a group of squatters to take over a restorable home in my area, park an old van in the drive and invite 10 people to live with them! I hope the printing press and bike shop cover the taxes, new roof, new plumbing, new electric,paint, gutters, porch repair, drywall, new windows, siding etc, but then the veggies they grow should offset these costs.

  18. sbrof

    11 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:34

    Aren't these the kind of people who we should invite into the city. I don't understand this negativity. They fought against an out of town landlord that was letting a property fall apart. They are doing their bes to maintain and improve upon their new-found property. They are looking to buy or lease more land for more garden space (better than rats and plastic bags right?) AND they are attempting to create several small businesses.

    Just because they are small basement based industries doesn't mean they are somehow illegitimate. How many big businesses were started in someones garage / basement. Honestly. If we want to promote local businesses we NEED people willing to get their hands dirty, take some risks, and start to produce profit for themselves.

    And so what if people want to live together. Maybe not everyone likes coming home to an empty house every night. These homes were built for families that were much larger than they are today. I doubt they are sleeping in bunk beds in some compound like setting. Let them fill the space, enjoy life and help to stabilize another small area of our west side.

  19. JohnMartin

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:36

    As I was reading this story, the first thing that came to mind was the Paper Street Soap Company.

  20. benfranklin

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:36

    eliz, the property has close to ten adults in and out of it daily, with no electricity, no gas service, and most likely no water. If a landlord let people live this way, he'd be put in jail. If the place caught on fire, you'd probably charge the landlord with a very serious crime. But call yourself an environmentalist, and you get a pass? In the next article they'll mention they road a bike in the 'gay' parade...then they'll REALLY be untouchable.

  21. Bishop

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:45

    Personally I would opt for a tree fort instead.

  22. iamBuffalosfuture

    9 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:51

    wow i love how these geezers on br love to bag on things they know nothing about, these people are harmless intelligent college-age kids and yes they have strong belief in what they are doing. benfranklin: thats your name b/c you grew up w/ him right?

  23. eyepharded

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:57

    Hippies

  24. benfranklin

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 10:58

    Interesting they are of college-age, but chose not to attend. Sorry to dissapoint, but I'm closer to college age, and probably know a few of these guys by name. Tried to let them help on a few projects, but when you see how they are willing to live, and how 'new' items begin to turn up out of no where...well, you realize what's your's will soon be there's. Do you have a specific problem with anything I've written? Where are they getting electricity, borrowing it from a neighbor? How 'bout the bathroom? Sure the closest restaurants know these guys real well, and not because their buying the specials.

  25. WilliamZabkaAllStars

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 11:02

    JohnMartin - POST OF THE YEAR!!!

    The first rule of "illegally squatting, veggie growing, bike repairing, t-shirt printing informal cooperative" is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT "ILLEGALLY SQUATTING, VEGGIE GROWING, BIKE REPAIRING, T-SHIRT PRINTING INFORMAL COOPERATIVE."

    As long as these people aren't a public nusiance, pay any applicable business/income/property taxes, and remain good citizens, I don't see what the big deal is. The moment they step out of line, though, all bets are off.

  26. Martin

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 11:05

    @ iambuffalosfuture...if you think this is a positive for our city and a shot in the arm for the area, then your screen name scares the hell outa me...signed, geezer

  27. Wilby

    8 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 11:06

    "Oh, no! They're different! They don't wear their Lacoste shirt collar's up or their Patagonia's zipped! They don't drive a Beemer! Therefore they are scary and BAD!"

    Until the people of Buffalo drop their pedestrian attitudes and fear of anything new or different, they will never change. Just because someone chooses to live in an unorthodox manner does not make them evil, predatory or dangerous. It just makes them different. The hysteria displayed on this thread is a pure example of this. You claim to want to embrace change - but that change must take the form of 'acceptable' and 'familiar'. Well, get over it! This is how progress starts - those with new ideas, or those that choose to implement old ideas in a new setting, are always the face of transformation. There's an old term - Follow The Freaks. How do you think Greenwich Village became a place to be? What about the North Side of Pittsburgh and the renovation beautiful old brownstones? The list goes on and on of people who can't afford traditional housing because of their chosen lifestyle - artists, musicians, etc. - that move into the rundown and the abandoned FIRST. Then a little while later, something else happens, it's called gentrification. And those that pioneered that particular area are once again forced to find a new, affordable, place to call home.

    There's another saying from Herbert Spencer: "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

    Before you call the cops or organize a lynch mob, try knocking on their door.

  28. sbrof

    9 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 11:30

    Except for the one person that lives on Bird, does anyone even know or have been impacted by these people or this house.. doubtful. They seem like people trying to make a life for themselves a little different than most, I don't get what the big deal is. They said they were RENTING which means they had power, water etc... They fought the landlord who knew about them, because he wouldn't take care of the property... We could only wish to have more people stand up to slumlords like this.

    Talk about mob mentality.

    VILLAGER #1: We have found a witch. May we burn her? CROWD: Burn her! Burn! Burn her! Burn her! BEDEVERE: How do you know she is a witch? VILLAGER #2: She looks like one. CROWD: Right! Yeah! Yeah! BEDEVERE: Bring her forward. WITCH: I'm not a witch. I'm not a witch. BEDEVERE: Uh, but you are dressed as one. WITCH: They dressed me up like this. CROWD: Augh, we didn't! We didn't... WITCH: And this isn't my nose. It's a false one. BEDEVERE: Well? VILLAGER #1: Well, we did do the nose. BEDEVERE: The nose? VILLAGER #1: And the hat, but she is a witch! CROWD: We burn her! Right! Yeaaah! Yeaah!

  29. reflip

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 11:42

    I do think it is interesting that we all try to plan for gentrification and create comfortable artist lofts that will attract people who we call "pioneers." Then, some actual "pioneers" show up sans official government program and we absolutely flip out with *suburban*style NIMBY hysteria. Wow, that's an incendiary statement if I ever made one. No stars.

    Having said that, squatting is a problem that can have tragic consequences. But it exists, and will continue to exist, where vacant houses live (and die). I will give these guys the benefit of the doubt for now because they are going public and making it seem that they have designs on becoming legit and working through appropriate channels to secure ownership.

    If they were truly nefarious, why would they announce themselves to the community like this? If they're sitting on a truckload of stolen property, why give out their names, address and phone #? Unless they're so devious that they are trying to conceal their illegal activities by keeping them out in the open. In fact, they could be criminal masterminds. Like the Joker from the Tim Burton Batman movie. Selling t-shirts = poisoned cosmetics. Diabolical...

  30. benfranklin

    7 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 11:48

    sbrof...you're so disconnected from life on the street, that you don't get this. These people were never renting anything. Once a property has been empty this long, National Grid has a funny way of cutting off the power (exactly because they know what happens when people like this get in). Once it's off for a year, you need a licensed electrician to certify everything is safe. This rarely happens without the electrician saying 'you need all new wiring." Your liberal bias says its a corrupt landlord. Maybe an elderly out of town relative didn't get back as often as they'd like. Oh no, that's not the liberal belief system you want to weave into this story. Bad landlord, good kids. Why not leave your door unlocked tonight, so these good kids can have some lunch money tomorrow.

  31. al-alo

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:03

    whatever you think of these individuals, this has an interesting underlying implication.

    Could homes that are abandoned by banks/owners be taken over? In DC, when a property is sold, tenents have the option of first purchasing the structure. Could that be an effective means of keeping local ownership and rebuilding the city's homeowner base?

    Take it one step further. Should a property owner with cronic code violations have the property siezed and transfered to tenents or cooperative?

    Frankly, anything sounds better than the status quo.

  32. carlmalone

    6 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:05

    "Oh, no! They're different! They don't wear their Lacoste shirt collar's up or their Patagonia's zipped! They don't drive a Beemer! Therefore they are scary and BAD!"

    You mean people that pay taxes and abide by the law. The first word that comes to my mind is (deleted) and the quicker the better.

  33. zen

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:07

    BF-you forgot to mention that the landlord prob has cancer.

  34. mbhxam

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:12

    I have literally been laughing out loud as I read these posts...are you kidding me?!?!?! Please continue with the numerous posts...this is pure comedy...

  35. blueribbon

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:16

    The description of an environmentalist collective saving an abandoned house on the West Side sounds so romantic and brave! But if you live in this area, it is yet another blight on the neighborhood. For a bit more background on this group, check out a publication called Rolling Thunder, Issue number four, Spring 2007. They published an article called The Art of Staying in Limbo: Stealing Houses in the Rust Belt by Chimney Swift and Raven of the Birdhouse Propaganda Ministry. The "collective" outlines their strategies and activities in regards to this very same house - pretty interesting reading, especially if you talk with close neighbors who have had to deal with them for the past 2 or more years. Maybe you'll like this quote from the article: "Our model can and will work for others, and we invite you to descend upon our city and others like it in a screaming, scheming horde."

  36. mbhxam

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:17

    I mean, seriously, these clowns write an email to this site, then after a brief telephone conversation we are supposed to take them at their word...where are the video cameras? this may be candid camera comes to buffalo...if these clowns tried this in my neighborhood i'd have them arrested for burglary...but liek i said before, pure comedy...

  37. RonR

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:19

    Sounds like Freegans to me.

    Oprah had a show on them yesterday, I recorded it because I was curious. Strangely, the website that was up and running yesterday is down today. freegan dot info. Google cashed the content. If you search for Freegan, the site is the #1 result. Click on the cashed version.

    In short it is people who want to live off the grid. Do not want to put money into the economy, feel there is too much waste and housing is a right.

    Here is what they have to say on housing

    Rent-Free Housing Freegans believe that housing is a RIGHT, not a privilege. Just as freegans consider it an atrocity for people to starve while food is thrown away, we are also outraged that people literally freeze to death on the streets while landlords and cities keep buildings boarded up and vacant because they can’t turn a profit on making them available as housing.

    Squatters are people who occupy and rehabilitate abandoned, decrepit buildings. Squatters believe that real human needs are more important than abstract notions of private property, and that those who hold deed to buildings but won’t allow people to live in them, even in places where housing is vitally needed, don’t deserve to own those buildings. In addition to living areas, squatters often convert abandoned buildings into community centers with programs including art activities for children, environmental education, meetings of community organizations, and more.

  38. buffalostan

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:20

    mbhxam-The West Side is being infiltrated by this cult and you find this comical? What if they have guns?

  39. benfranklin

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:21

    Zen - you get points for paying attention. Without nono to correct me, I'm getting sloppy.

    Anyway, people keep mentioning the 'landlord'. There was never a landlord relationship here. The current tenant broke in, found it stripped, and said 'cool, we could live here'.

    People here really think this is a way to distribute property? Siding with common criminals over 'chronic code' violators is so absurd I can barely type. Buffalo Rising? How 'bout Buffalo-falling so far that we're grasping for any straw?

  40. mbhxam

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:30

    The comedy comes from the people posting on this site who actually think these people are a benefit to the community...i can't even write anymore...i am shocked that what these people are doing would garner any kind of positive reception...unbelievable!

  41. mPuma

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:32

    Great idea for housing revitalization on the west side. I give the current owners major props for sticking with the owner and this bull for so long. It should be much easier for people to secure properties which have been abandonded or left behind by flippers.

  42. sbrof

    6 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:38

    "As of November 20th 2007 I (the "squatters") finally managed to secure ownership of the deed... and now we are rebuilding the house."

    Sure they might have started out by moving into an abandoned vacant house but they no longer are squatting. They own the house and presumably will start to pay taxes etc... These are not hobos moving into a building, starting fires on the second floor and burning the place down.. BIG DIFFERENCE HERE PEOPLE.

    If it takes some squatters to take back forgotten about properties and returning them to the tax roles and productive use.. so be it..

    Actually the City has a program for just this thing.. It is called Urban Homesteading. The only difference is these people didn't wait for the building to be in such bad shape, demolished or so far into debt that the city took ownership of it to begin with. Because once it is in government hands it never easily leaves them.

    I say kudos to these people for finding a better and faster solution to getting property out of the hands of negligent landlords. And I don't care if they are elderly, have cancer or anything. If they can't take care of their property they should have sold it instead of letting it fall into debt and become a burden on everyone else since we (the city) in the end acquires these properties.

  43. Astroman

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:49

    My reaction to this story is that allowing squatters to take over ownership of a neglected property sets a weird precedent. As somebody who aspires to own his own home one day and is trying to do so by contributing to the economy like normal working folks, I have to wonder who is really paying the cost for these folks to live in this house? It's impossible to imagine that they're paying property taxes and utilities like ordinary working people. Where do they get the money? And if they aren't paying, they should be. Everyone else has to.

  44. manski

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:54

    You have to purchase the issue of Rolling Thunder to read the article on this house and group, but here's a link to a summary of it from Infoshop News - anarchist news, opinion, and much more (that's from their website's banner, not my opinion):

    http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20070423205750871

    I have some mixed feelings about this whole thing, there is a benefit to having this house rehabbed etc. But there is a legal means to aquire ownership of a property, and I would be interested to hear if this group ever attempted to follow that path. My guess is they did not, and to portray them as "activists" working towards improving the community to me seems misguided at best. Sounds to me like they wanted a place to live without paying for it.

  45. reflip

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 12:57

    College-aged kids who didn't go to college writing nihilistic, anti-capitalistic diatribes in counterculture underground zines and making t-shirts for local (presumably punk/hardcore) bands? Wow, that's a real threat to society. Lock 'em up. Take away their vintage Operation Ivy and Black Flagg records. Stomp on them, too (just to rub it in).

  46. benfranklin

    7 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:00

    You guys are right. If someone has a better use for a property, it should become there's. I'm proposing the thirty minute rule. If you someone leaves their property for thirty minutes, you can take it. Heck, it's your right, right? I mean jeez, have you seen the color on some of these houses? As a matter of fact, some of these old people don't leave very often, so let's say it's ok to take there houses while their still in them, heck, they'll be dead soon anyway. This is a much better way to redistribute homes than the old fashioned way of working, and saving, and working, and saving. That's so played out. I've got my eye on this beautiful ranch on Lebrun in Snyder...but the damn family never seems to leave....

  47. STEEL

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:01

    This is a great house. It likely would have been torn down if these folks did not come along. Without judging this group pro or con there is the seed of a concept here that the City does not seem to grasp. If a the market for a product does not exist then you need to lower the price and do other things to create a market. The city has no plan and as such nothing ever happens.

    Instead of suing the banks that own these properties why not work with the banks to eliminate liens and why not eliminate back taxes on these properties for people willing to take them over and invest in them. Why not eliminate property taxes on them for a certain period in exchange for investment in them. Why not work with the state to create income tax free zones in distressed communities. From the stories reported on BRO it sounds more like the city is doing everything possible to discourage investors.

  48. Martin

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:02

    i love the part where they blame the bank for being a poor property owner, yep, the bank ran it into the ground folks. did they even approach the original owner and try and purchase this property? me thinks not. rather just a group of freeloaders trying to bilk the system and garner support through BRO.

  49. tudorguy

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:05

    I can understand hesitation or skepticism, but when did it make the leap to "cult"? That I don't get.

  50. Martin

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:08

    @ STEEL good plan, but it is being done already, just ask council member Brian Davis.

  51. chris69

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:11

    It doesnt take much to put a house that people want to demolish back on the market especially if caught early.

    The city and preservationists would be better at putting funds into new roofs and gutters and paint jobs etc (minor repairs) and putting the house on the market than in demolition.

    Its worked in other cities...my question is why does it take 25 years after everyone else for Buffalo to catch onto a good idea.

  52. benfranklin

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:15

    ...admitted by the wonderful college aged kids....

    " then broke in through the basement window, kicked the boards off the back kitchen door, and installed locks there, and began using it as the main door."

    "The house was trapped in limbo with no overseer; without a legitimate complaint from the landlord or the block club, they had to wait. Almost mysteriously, we've had no more trouble with the police."

    "We forged the lease agreement to get the house inspected and they never set foot inside due to our construction efforts. After we took care of the cosmetic housing court violations, the city practically left us alone.

    "so long as you get out of housing court and no one looks up your address on the city website and gets an inspector to demand a certificate of occupancy, deed, or lease agreement. "

    ... oh yeah.... this is great.

  53. sbrof

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:23

    There are thousands of properties in this city just like this one. It is painfully obvious between people who try and those that don't care about their property. It isn't someones right to a home and you should save and pay for one, but the way the system works is by the time it is out of the hands of the owners that don't care, it is already too late. There is so much debt, and back taxes no one would take them. Hence the total lack of demand for homes that should be sold dirt cheap to get people into them.

    benfranklin I see your point, 30 minutes is extreme. But how many years does a property need to sit vacant before the government or someone else step in? Would you rather this building continue to be owned by the bank, with no hope for investment? Sit there for another 2 years before a flipper buys in and tries to sell it on ebay or maybe 10 years when the roof collapses or someone burns it down?

    The system in regards to a property like this, is broken.

  54. mmjazz

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:24

    "Over that time period we took multiple visits to Housing Court to attempt to get a hold of the ownership. We figured that if we were the owners, then we could fix it up instead of watching it deteriorate year after year. Finally we were evicted this past July (presumably for stirring up trouble for the out-of-town-landlord). Even after we were evicted we continued to follow up with housing court dates. Eventually Housing Court (Judge Nowak) went after the owner." This a quote from the article.

    Folks, this truly is the most hilarious thread I have every heard. I almost choked on alfalfa sprouts when I read "tee shirt informal cooperative" that is some funny s@#$#$#$. I think we have to separate our emotional feelings about Buffalo's recovery and progress and the actual law. Some folks have been right on this thread: you don't want squatters in your neighborhood, manson like or not. If we posit ourselves as normal, and we can think of bad things happening at this mystery house, what are the weirdos going to do? It's against the law. If we really want to help Buffalo recover we need legimate bank funded loans in the hands of people who will fix up the property and do the right thing. I understand the emotions here. These "cooperative" people are going to fix it up. How nice of them? They didnt pay a red cent for it--and there is an implication that they are going to blame the landowner. I am an out of towner--I want to buy a place to fix up in Buffalo, and I want to do the right thing. Sell it to me. The bank should claim this thing/or city and then try to find someone who can salvage it and do it under the law. I am available. I am not a right wing nut job. But i must say this. We need personal ownership and resonsibility. Just because someone is out of town and they have money, doesnt make them a bad person. I am doing ok financially, and I love Buffalo. I would love nothing more than to buy a property, fix it up and beautify the city.

    SBFLO, we have the same sensibilites about this. I just think that if you permit this to happen, it sends the wrong message. We need solid families living there, solid developers who will rent to good people, and the safety, beauty and perspective of Buffalo will gradually change. If we allow this to happen, we are telling people: don't get a job, dont be 'stable', dont own anything. The romanticism of it is appealing. But dont be fooled. It is very selffish to prey on someone else's misfortune in losing the house, blame them for mismanagement--then, to top it off, try to elicit some bizarre sympathy by saying that you are going to do the right thing by planting flowers in vacant pool. This is one more symbolic attempt to piss on the 'man' or the people with money holding us back--They are saying "f you" to his nice Gatsby pool, and throw some Lord Byron like flowers in it. Guys, next time I am in town I am going to the west side, I am going to whip out some Samuel Coleridge, Percy Shelley and just hole up in some random houses--

    People in buff need to get over the idea that people with money are evil. Money's not evil, its the intent behind it. I dont want to see any slum lords in Buffalo, but I also dont want selfish hippies either.

    Hippies who recite the romantics and truly love buffalo and want to start their vegetarian restaurant business, then that's a different story. Give them a tax credit, a more liberal gesture. Is the Jeffery Lebowski in this house? What came from Home Depot that tied the room together? These squatters might not even be able to write a ninety cent check for milk?

    Again, hilarious stuff Martin, Ben Franklin you folks are freakin funny--I miss that Buffalo wit!!!!!!!!!

  55. CleverGirl

    6 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:31

    So, all you "normal" tax-paying, law abiding citizens - what exactly are YOU doing about the condition of these abandoned houses on your street or in your neighborhood? Have you been trying to make a difference, in any way at all? Must be easy to sit on your ass and pretend you know what's going on. "hippies" or "freaks as these people may be, they ARE doing something, unlike any of you complainers. This house is being saved from becoming yet another rotted out hulk that will have to get demolished by the city using YOUR tax money. I've known a few of the people who've lived in this house, and trust me - there's nothing scary or evil about them, aside from maybe not bathing regularly. It's sad to see that an effort to save a house from falling apart is being construed as some evil act.

  56. Texpat10

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:33

    Cool idea Ben. When these guys leave...if they leave...let's walk in and take the house. I don't really like the looks of this place. My Mercedes would look way better in the driveway and I am sure there is ample closet space for my Lacoste wardrobe.

    This isn't about people buying a house and fixing it up. It doesn't seem like 80% of the people posting get what this is all about. I see people using the term landlord and renting and revitalization. Where is that coming from? Squatting and acquiring a house via adverse posession has nothing to do with any of that. Yes, this house was vacant but do you think this group has the resources to fix it up? Do you think 10 unrelated people living in a house that is at least partially heated with a woodstove make good neighbors? Look at the pictures. Does it look like the 10 people living here have been working around the clock to renovate it?

    I am not trying to demonize anyone. I am being a realist. This has nothing to do with their different ideas. It is about how they acquired this house, what they are doing with it today and what they will have the resources to do with it in the the future.

    Sbrof I hope you come home one day and find these people living in your garage and unwilling to leave.

  57. carl

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:38

    X!crust punx!X

    the bird house are good people.

    but i must say that this article is out of place in the $2500 dollar yuppie loft usual development news on BR.... but I will take NO RENT over 2500 a month any day.

    and according to the article in rolling thunder, the previous owner wanted nothing to do with the building due to bank problems, and leans against the property...it seems like some people are only interested in something, if SOME ONE ELSE finds value in it, kind of like sheep. following the heard. would it be better if this house just sat and roted like so many others in the city? i say no!

    and for the record, squats can be very good for a neighborhood. take for example abc no rio, which led to redevelopment of an entire neighborhood! http://www.abcnorio.org/

  58. reflip

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:39

    However you slice it, these folks are entrepreneurial. They are exactly what we clamor for endlessly on this site - young people moving into the city, taking initiative and rehabbing a vacant house. Unfortunately, they're anarchists. Woops! "Wide Right" lives on in Buffalo.

  59. benfranklin

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:42

    Texpat10...maybe we should wait til the garden is ready for harvest, the new roof is on, wiring, plumbing, etc. is complete. Then we roll, just after dark. Maybe the night before we should let the air out of their tires, just so they know we mean business.

  60. whitneyarlene

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:43

    I don't understand. A formerly vacant property in a struggling neighborhood is now home to excited, young homeowners. What's so bad about that?

  61. Texpat10

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:43

    Sorry Clevergirl. Not bathing regularly IS scarry. Have you been in the house? Can you give us an update on the progress of the renovations?

  62. Martin

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:46

    @CLEVERGIRL they never should of filled in the pool then if they are not bathing...not so clever now...are you girl?

  63. Texpat10

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:49

    I am all for taking the food but I think I'd rather have the electrical system and plumbing done by licensed contractors. I don't want my wardrobe going in smoke or my ability to bathe regularly being put at risk.

  64. CleverGirl

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:52

    texpat - as someone before me suggested, why don't you ring the doorbell and find out for yourself? I'm sure the owners would be happy to give you a tour.

  65. benfranklin

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:53

    ....not using licensed contractors!?!? How dare you say something so negative about our entrepreneurial-college-aged environmentalists. If only they'd take a bath, clevergirl was preparing a house-warming party for them.

  66. carl

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:54

    benfranklin, carlmalone,

    you know, threatening violence against someone is a crime too!

    "Then we roll, just after dark. Maybe the night before we should let the air out of their tires, just so they know we mean business." "You mean people that pay taxes and abide by the law. The first word that comes to my mind is, arson, and the quicker the better."

  67. RisingDamp666

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:57

    If these guys were squatting in East Buffalo, would you be objecting? Where is the threat to your 'pursuit of happiness'? They're just a bunch of Bird-brained hippies. Usually that lot hang around college campuses, couch surfing and scouring the pavement for long butts. That they have aspired to home ownership in a way that reveals contradictions in the system seems to really irritate you poor, mortgaged souls. So what. While you toil in terror of missing the next installment, I could open my safe deposit and pull out just one envelope, the contents with which I could buy your house, your car, and everything else you treasure and feed it to these hippies. The game can be played at many levels, my friends. As to these 10 homesteaders, as the posts above clearly indicate, it'll end in tears.

  68. sbrof

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:57

    They moved into this property because it was vacant, and unwanted. My house, garage or anyone else's isn't. Different situation. They didn't have to push anyone out to move in. I do agree that we should all be cognizant of their means. Can they upkeep the house? Are they going to pay the taxes now that they have ownership? They should and if they don't, they, just like the previous owners shouldn't be allowed to let it sit and rot.

    Property is at best leased by the government. I can't put in a pig pen, bon-fire pit, smelting furnace or other noxious or dangerous things on my property. Why should someone else be allowed to let something rot, become vacant, structurally unstable next to me. Because they own it? Does that gives them a right to endanger other people and ruin a streets property values?

    Yeah I see the point of the precedent that this poses, and the illegality of what they did. But in the end I don't somehow feel threatened or harmed by their actions. In fact I would be glad if they took over a soon to be arson trap on my street. The city would also love to have 10,000 more of them. If they are all going to make an effort, and become home owners. The city owns thousands of properties, if anything we should encourage people that want to become homeowners and invest in our city to get their hands on one, or two of them for free.

  69. Martin

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 13:58

    @ CLEVERGIRL...Is the electric up and running for the doorbell to work or are they pulling steam power from the wood burning stove in the "music room"?

  70. CleverGirl

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:02

    btw, real nice benfranklin, texpat, and martin. let's go and attack people online! because making stupid and uneducated guesses about people YOU DON'T KNOW is so much cooler than doing something productive. I'm not defending squatting, but these people took the step to acquire the house legally - which means they had to pay back taxes on it, as well as invest money into it. Why are you so sure they don't have jobs and don't pay taxes? Where do you get off pretending to know ANYTHING at all about them?

    Get back to selling flowers, Martin, I'm sure that's doing a whole lot to solve the problems of your neighborhood.

  71. eliz

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:04

    Well, all said and done, if they fail to get the place adequately fixed up, inspections will come down on them, particularly since they're not exactly operating under the radar. (I'm guessing some commenters have fired off an email to City Hall already.) So the building will be condemned or whatever. If they do fix the house up, then you have a rescued property in an area where it's not so easy to attract owners through traditional methods. I'm still not seeing the horrible threat here.

  72. kjthomas77

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:08

    i, too, am torn about this situation, and i'm enjoying some of the comments here. i consider myself very openminded, especially when it comes to fresh reuse/repurpose ideas for buffalo's many architectural gems, rotting or otherwise. however, i had to work my ass off to buy my 100 year old home, and i continue to have to do so just to keep it maintained, let alone collect the funds necessary to restore it. and, i have to pay the ridiculous city and county property taxes to boot...

    i applaud these folks if their intention is to truly get this place habitable again, no matter how many of them are living there. i even applaud their desire to want to stay off the grid and support themselves in a manner that rests outside the capitalist system here. however, i have a bit of doubt over whether or not their efforts are truly going to pay off, at least against a standard that any reasonably-minded reader/contributor here would expect. it reminds me of the legitimate co-op situation (forgive me, i can't recall their name) that began a few years back on the corner of north and elmwood. these young people came in, bought the house, cleaned up the trash outside, and did some minor structural work. i lived just 100 yards up the street, and i could not have been more excited to see someone, anyone, come in and give life to this great structure. it didn't matter to me how many people lived there; i had incredibly high hopes for the place. yet, years later, this grand old home looks no different from the day they bought it. it's sad...the same chimney work that began just after they bought it, sits there untouched...and from what can be seen from the street, some of the exterior facade is in disrepair. now, i'm not saying anyone who buys an old home needs to make it pretty and ready for the cover of architectural digest, but funny enough, i thought that they just might. it's incredibly disappointing to see that the only difference in the destiny of this great structure since this co-op came along is merely that it is inhabited...

    so i feel that if this informal bird house co-op wants any modicum of approval or support - and i suspect that they desire at least a little bit, otherwise they would not have come running to BRO - from their surrounding neighbors and community, they should have to be a bit more forthcoming with their intentions and their plans for this house. then, i think everyone here would have a bit more respect for their actions and their situation...at least i would. at least then, i would be willing to forgive the fact that they seemingly broke the law and are now trying to sugarcoat it in order to obtain ownership of this house. and btw, does this mean i need to make sure someone house-sits my home from now on if i want to go on vacation or out of town on business?? just curious...

    and one last little thing...i'd really like to see the reciept from payment of their property taxes. if we are supposed to laud them with support for rescuing this property, i damn sure want to see that they are going to contribute to the taxbase here in the city.

  73. benfranklin

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:11

    Clevergirl, they've posted the details of their theft online. Yes, that's how THEY describe it. The links up above. Before you look any more foolish, why not learn a little about what's going on. As far as measurement of productivity, name the gauge, and I'd be glad to let you know my progress for today, or whatever time period you'd like.

  74. RisingDamp666

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:11

    Welcome to Buffalo: The City Of Tolerance.

  75. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:14

    Folks, this truly is the most hilarious thread I have every heard. I almost choked on alfalfa sprouts when I read "tee shirt informal cooperative" that is some funny s@#$#$#$. I think we have to separate our emotional feelings about Buffalo's recovery and progress and the actual law. Some folks have been right on this thread: you don't want squatters in your neighborhood, manson like or not. If we posit ourselves as normal, and we can think of bad things happening at this mystery house, what are the weirdos going to do? It's against the law. If we really want to help Buffalo recover we need legimate bank funded loans in the hands of people who will fix up the property and do the right thing. I understand the emotions here. These "cooperative" people are going to fix it up. How nice of them? They didnt pay a red cent for it--and there is an implication that they are going to blame the landowner. I am an out of towner--I want to buy a place to fix up in Buffalo, and I want to do the right thing. Sell it to me. The bank should claim this thing/or city and then try to find someone who can salvage it and do it under the law. I am available. I am not a right wing nut job. But i must say this. We need personal ownership and resonsibility. Just because someone is out of town and they have money, doesnt make them a bad person. I am doing ok financially, and I love Buffalo. I would love nothing more than to buy a property, fix it up and beautify the city.

    SBFLO, we have the same sensibilites about this. I just think that if you permit this to happen, it sends the wrong message. We need solid families living there, solid developers who will rent to good people, and the safety, beauty and perspective of Buffalo will gradually change. If we allow this to happen, we are telling people: don't get a job, dont be 'stable', dont own anything. The romanticism of it is appealing. But dont be fooled. It is very selffish to prey on someone else's misfortune in losing the house, blame them for mismanagement--then, to top it off, try to elicit some bizarre sympathy by saying that you are going to do the right thing by planting flowers in vacant pool. This is one more symbolic attempt to piss on the 'man' or the people with money holding us back--They are saying "f you" to his nice Gatsby pool, and throw some Lord Byron like flowers in it. Guys, next time I am in town I am going to the west side, I am going to whip out some Samuel Coleridge, Percy Shelley and just hole up in some random houses--

    People in buff need to get over the idea that people with money are evil. Money's not evil, its the intent behind it. I dont want to see any slum lords in Buffalo, but I also dont want selfish hippies either.

    Hippies who recite the romantics and truly love buffalo and want to start their vegetarian restaurant business, then that's a different story. Give them a tax credit, a more liberal gesture. Is the Jeffery Lebowski in this house? What came from Home Depot that tied the room together? These squatters might not even be able to write a ninety cent check for milk?

    Again, hilarious stuff Martin, Ben Franklin you folks are freakin funny--I miss that Buffalo wit!!!!!!!!!

  76. Martin

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:14

    @ CLEVERGIRL who's panty's are getting into a twist then, hmmmm? You are more than welcome to come to my tax paying, legal lease, fully plumbed, heated, rehabed, adding to Buffalo's revival, beautiful store any time for a flower to brighten up your day!

  77. mmjazz

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:15

    Sorry about the double post-thought it didnt go through

  78. wizardofza

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:16

    So many of you people are @#$%ing retarded.

    Let me get this straight....this house would be much better off abandoned and rotting in place rather than finding a new use thanks to a bunch of young people who live a lifestyle that offends your delicate sensibilities and reactionary cultural biases?

    It's funny how this nation was founded by so many people who came over on boats living scrappy, bare-bones lifestyles more similar to these hygienically-challenged crustpunks than anything remotely close to the apathetic, energy resource and infotainment-spoiled masses of contemporary American consumerist society. This country was built on small-scale, "at home" enterprise and backyard food-growing these kids are at least attempting.

    Perhaps there are people who find true happiness living a rich,full life not being shackled to the system of corporate feudalism that most mainstream people take for granted. I guess, the only legitimate form of renewal in this city is that which involved $2000 lawyer lofts equipped with wrap-around granite counter tops and heated underground parking for their late model SUVs.

  79. carl

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:18

    this is actually not totally illegal, so dont jump to conclusions, in common law it is called Adverse possession, look it up, squatters do actually have rights!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

    "In common law, adverse possession is the process by which title to another's real property is acquired without compensation, by, as the name suggests, holding the property in a manner that conflicts with the true owner's rights for a specified period of time. Circumstances of the adverse possession determine the type of title acquired by the adverse possessor, which may be fee simple title, mineral rights, or another interest in real property.

    The law of adverse possession is partly statutory and partly common law. The required period of uninterrupted possession arises out of a statutory limitation period or statute of limitations. Other elements of adverse possession are judicial constructs.

    Adverse possession is sometimes called "squatters' rights". If the squatter abandons the property for a period, or if the rightful owner effectively removes the squatter's access even temporarily during the statutory period, or even gives his permission, the "clock" usually stops. For example, if the required period in a given jurisdiction is twenty years and the squatter is removed after only fifteen years, the squatter loses the benefit of that 15 year possession (i.e., the "clock" is re-set to "zero"). If that squatter later retakes possession of the property, that squatter must, in order to acquire title, remain on the property for a full twenty years after the date on which the squatter retook possession. In this example, the squatter would have to have held the property for a total of 35 years (the 15 original years plus the 20 later years) to acquire title.

    However, one squatter may pass along continuous possession to another squatter, known as "tacking", until the adverse possession period is complete. A lawful owner may also restart the "clock" at "zero" by giving temporary permission for the occupation of the property, thus defeating the necessary "continuous and hostile" element. Evidence that a "squatter" paid rent to the owner would defeat adverse possession for that period."

  80. sbrof

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:19

    This is in an area that very few people would invest in if they had to take out an expensive mortgage and pay tons of liens. It is also an area where anyone worried more about their return on investment more than actually owning a home would steer very clear of. And since most people buy houses... for investments, not for homeownership, it had no future.

    So unless there were other people lining up the buy this property... It was either going to become a rat infested, arson prone trap or a home for ten people who wanted a slice of the American Dream. Those are the real options for properties at this point in the legal system.

    Remember how difficult it was for the West Village Renaissance. Corp to wrangle the the property on Johnson Park out of the City's hands when there was a legal buyer waiting to take it on...

  81. phenimore

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:24

    I lived one block from here for four years and talked with a few of the people that inhabited this place before they were evicted. They all seemed friendly and very willing to talk to curious neighbors. I don't know if it's for better or worse except to say that in this case something is better than nothing. I am still a member of the fledgling Potomac/West Block club that just started last fall and we spoke about this at length with people from the Bird/West group. We all agreed that having some hippy kids making an attempt at something that might fail is better than leaving a run down building available for the crack addicts and whores that inhabit that area already. Someone made the suggestion that these people would simply be thieves and vandals; well what do you think this neighborhood is already full of? They did illegally squat on a property and eventually aquire it through sheer determination. I am suprised and happy to hear they didnt give up after being evicted. Our city needs more people with that kind of grit. I also completely support the housing court's decision to allow this group to take over the house. Let it be a precedent for delinquent landlords throughout the city to be put on notice. I don't know if this will work, I can't fathom the capital that will be needed to move this giant house up to anything resembling habital code, but I know that it's better than the alternative. I wish them all the best and will look forward to meeting them at the block club meetings.

  82. Martin

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:28

    was there a chance for people to buy this property on the open market at all...ever? whatever the outcome of this is, bottom line these people broke into somebody elses property.

  83. reflip

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:30

    benfranklin,

    Allow me to clarify my descriptions:

    Based on the definition of the word, they are entrepreneurial. Which is ironic, since the general consensus in this region is that we need more entrepreneurial types. Ha ha. Guess we should be careful about what we wish for.

    I think you were the first one to say that these people are "college-aged" and I believe you are the only one who has refered to them as "environmentalists" (even though you are doing so ironically).

    I don't know if they're college-aged or not (though it would explain their anarchist-punk world-view) and I don't care about their carbon footprint. This is a debate about the legitimacy of property rights versus the public blight of abandoned housing, and it isn't new. This group has exploited a broken system and, by doing so, laid it bare. I guess the question is, can they by opposing it end it (to paraphrase Hamlet's dilemma).

  84. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:31

    When you finally get exasperated enough and move to the suburbs, Martin, you can pose your questions to a village council and enjoy some knitting at the same time.

  85. carl

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:32

    "An adverse possessor will be committing a trespass on the property that they have taken and the owner of the property could cause them to be evicted by an action in trespass ("ejectment") or by bringing an action for possession. All common law jurisdictions require that the action of trespass is brought within a specified time, after which the true owner is assumed to have acquiesced. The effect of a failure by the land owner to evict the adverse possessor depends on the jurisdiction."

    so basically the owner has to request the people to leave, then call the cops if they don't. if that doesn't happen (which in this case it looks like he/she didn't), and no one bothers them, if they stay there for a specific period of time,(in ny state i think 8-10 years) the house can become legally theirs. But they can obtain a legal deed before then by proving the legal owner has leans against the property and has no interest in it. so their action was not as illegal as people are making it out to be!

  86. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:35

    Why do these hippies get tobreak the law and then acquire property? come on now, these hippies should have to pay the same we everyone else does... Although even though theyre scummy hippies they dont have a Subaru Outback yet, maybe they can steal one, hold it long enough and then get title to the vehicle... Do they make Soap in the basement here? Bet the NYS Sales tax board would love to hear of their new biz venture... Tyler Durden

  87. carl

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:36

    "In some jurisdictions, a person who has successfully obtained title to property by adverse possession may (optionally) bring an action in land court to "quiet title" of record in their names on some or all of the former owner's property. Such action will make it simpler to convey the interest to others in a definitive manner, and also serves as notice that there is a new "owner" of record, which may be a pre-requisite to certain benefits (including equity loans, or judicial standing as an abutter). However, even if such action is not taken, the title is legally theirs, with most of the benefits and duties, including paying property taxes to avoid losing title to the tax collector. The effects of having a stranger to the title paying taxes on property may vary from one jurisdiction to another."

    this may actually be a legitimate method to take back a whole list of abandoned properties in the city, for which the owners have simply vanished!

  88. cyndrome

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:40

    Going collective to take on a project like this is not a bad idea, but they seem more concerned with growing their own food than with fixing up the place. This house looks to need some major tlc and I would hope they are looking into grants and/or cra or similar type loans. Hint: start with the roof.

  89. blueribbon

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:44

    phenimore, I, too, would look forward to meeting these folks at block club meetings. But don't count on it, unless they have had a change of heart since publishing the article about their activities in Rolling Thunder last spring.

    "Block clubs, by and large, are the bane of squatters and underclass occupants in general. We feared the block club, at least until our first meeting with them. We realized then that they were falling apart and needed a new volunteer moderator to schedule meetings. So we invited them to have a meeting at our house and naturally volunteered one of us to become the new block club president. We forgot to organize the next meeting in time and decided against organizing any more, and in a few weeks the block club was dissolved. Eureka, coup d'etat."

  90. carl

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:45

    BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME,

    no, that is different, because usually if your car is stolen, usually you would report it to the police. then they would be in possession of stolen property. if no one reports a piece of property stolen, there is know way of knowing that it is. also, most crimes have a statue of limitations, a period of time after which you can no longer be charged for a crime. the statute of limitations for trespass is usually between 1 and 6 years, no more than 6...depending on a lot of stuff, including jurisdiction, (i am a junior architect, and have studied housing/building law)

  91. Martin

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:47

    no comment...knit one pearl two

  92. carl

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:49

    actually the statute of limitations for trespass is 2 years!

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=ok&vol=/appeals/1998/&invol=1998okcivapp135

  93. kjthomas77

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:51

    "Block clubs, by and large, are the bane of squatters and underclass occupants in general. We feared the block club, at least until our first meeting with them. We realized then that they were falling apart and needed a new volunteer moderator to schedule meetings. So we invited them to have a meeting at our house and naturally volunteered one of us to become the new block club president. We forgot to organize the next meeting in time and decided against organizing any more, and in a few weeks the block club was dissolved. Eureka, coup d'etat."

    holy shit...these guys are either geniuses or the biggest bunch of idiots i have ever seen. if they aired such ideology in another, accessible publication, then why, why, why would they prance their dog and pony show here for all to see? do they have no idea what the regular readers of BRO can be like? granted, this is no block club, but jesus...people have a way of stirring up shit, and by golly, i think i can smell it cooking right now...

  94. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:53

    Thanks for the law school lesson Carl, you cant quiet title on a car, Im well aware of that...now get back to your law books and go defend these hippies pro bono...theyre going to need it... QE...Your true Subaru Outback Patagonia LL Bean Golden Retriever hippiness is showing

  95. benfranklin

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:55

    blueribbon... you're giving this crowd far too many facts to digest. Somehow the other posters will explain to us that block clubs are no good, and the college-aged-entreprenuerial-environmentalists surely meant no harm. We just don't understand.

  96. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 14:56

    BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME, expect a card from your title insurer this Christmas!

  97. mmjazz

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:01

    kjthomas, nice balanced perspective. We are bickering some, and I think our bickering reflects a dynamic differences between world views between certain Buffaloians.

    Clevergirl: why do these people deserve this property? Not to be rude, but they are STEALING! Not exactly the message we want to send.

    It is my humble opinion that the people who are blindly supporting this are the ones who are keeping development, fiscal responsibility, and corporations from Buffalo. Would you employee these people? Should we just send them a welfare check?

  98. carl

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:03

    BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME,

    did i say that you could?

    i love when people make offensive, threatening comments when they have the anonymity of the internet to hide behind, but i real life, are as timid as wounded field mice. (or just simply are offensive and close minded)

  99. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:05

    So, what do you discuss at your block club meeting, benfranklin? Who doesn't roll their empty garbage bins back after pick-up day? Who doesn't clean up after their pets? Who leaves their sprinkler on overnight? Yeah, you're just so above these people.

  100. mbhxam

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:07

    wow...did someone really compare these people to the founding fathers/mothers of our country...this post is the greatest thing ever...

  101. benfranklin

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:10

    reflip...they're called 'environmentalists' in the first sentence of the article. The "harmless intelligent college-age kids" is thanks to "Iambuffalosfuture", which if it's true, I along with other's here, are seriously concerned.

  102. fredrico

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:12

    I have been assisting the people who live directly across the street from this house - the BIRD HOUSE" for about 5 years. I knew and spoke to the original owner of the house- because I approached him when he was mowing the lawn and begged him to be careful who he sold the house to ( in reponse to his announcedment that he was mowing the lawn because he grew up in this house and was putting the house up for sale). I told him that the block really needed his help and support because drug dealing people seemed to be renting allot from absentee (out of town homeowners) and I was praying he would sell the house to a local person. He assured me - "oh yes - yes - we care about the neighborhood where we were raised and where my parents lived", etc. Then I NEVER saw him again. I never saw a " for sale" sign go up, the grass grew high, the property started falling apart, there were breakins, there were drug deals, others broke in and stole the fireplace mantle and chandileers. There was a shooting there one night. Still no sightings of the owner. 3 years went by. A policeman began to park at that corner every night because the drug dealers were in full force. The prostitutes took over an abondoned house about 7 houses up - at the corner of bird and Niagara. they were hanging out on the corner and doing Johns up the street every day until the block club got the police involved and they were forced out of THAT house. Then one day - Tim and his "strange" friends showed up. Of course I went over and introduced myself. They were all pleasant enough. Deep down I knew they did not own the house. In reality that meant they were "stealing" yet I couldn't help but be supportive for four reasons. 1. All of a sudden there was peace and no crime in the house and around that yard at least. That was big in my eyes. 2. A beautiful house that I had watched become severely distroyed was being saved (what was left of it) and I respected that. 3. I learned they were working with the owner to try to buy the house and I respected that too. 4. Whenever the neighbors had a crises or needed a hand (including me) they were always quick to lend a hand - and that was so much better than always being in fear for our lives from previous "visitors" to the house.

    In fact - when the neighbors learned that this group was going to be evicted we all wrote letters (including myself) and some when to court -to show our support because in spite of their faults - we thought that the BIRD House people brought increased safety to the corner. My only complaint was that the traveling squatters that would stop by would sometimes have pets the didn't always recieve the best nutritional & medical care. But Tim has promised me that they are going to make "house rules" about pet care and standards. I have seen both sides - the house and neighborhood without these people -- and the house with and I would like them to stay. Lets reuse these houses and make safe neighborhoods again. It would stop the waste of demolishing really interesting and creative homes and would bring more stability to the neighborhoods. It did in this case.

  103. benfranklin

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:14

    Hey rise..yes, I'm slightly above these people because 1.) I shower 2.) I have never stolen property 3.) would be smart enough, should I have succeded in my theft, not to talk about it, or post it to the internet. Gotta love the anarchists that charge a subscription for their magazine. Anarchists....accept when it hurts cash flow.

  104. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:19

    "Allow me to clarify my descriptions: Based on the definition of the word, they are entrepreneurial. Which is ironic, since the general consensus in this region is that we need more entrepreneurial types. Ha ha. Guess we should be careful about what we wish for."

    If squatting is becoming an 'entrepreneur", we are in real trouble. I can't fathom anyone that would call stealing someone's property entreprenuerial. They take someone's misfortune call it their own and squat. Maybe they should get a got damn job. This group of people can come up with 500 a month to pay for rent? You tax payers of Buffalo and WNY are paying for this so called entreprenurial behavior. There are actual poor, disenfrachised people that I feel emapathy for that work minimum wage, try to get educated and try to better themselves. Here we have worse: people who steal and cheat, do nothing and try to claim they are beautitying Buffalo--guys, it really should make people angry.

  105. Joshua

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:21

    ben, we can all thank God for that!

    I've only heard about the "Bird House" but never been around it or knew much about it.

  106. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:23

    Well it's nice to know that if you lost everything including your home, that you have the decency and integrity to become homeless and live on the streets quietly, without accepting any help or donations and doing everything you can to support the system that left you penniless. Kudos, benfranklin!

  107. sbrof

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:23

    "wow...did someone really compare these people to the founding fathers/mothers of our country...this post is the greatest thing ever.."

    it wasn't too long ago that we were moving across this country, squatting on land, claiming it as our own. And shooting those who said otherwise. Somehow we feel it was OK to kill tribes of Indians for their land but squatting in someone's house they obviously want nothing to do with anymore posses a moral dilemma.

  108. wizardofza

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:25

    Anarchists....accept when it hurts cash flow.

    I bet those anarchists can spell better than you.

  109. RisingDamp666

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:26

    Don't give them any ideas, sbrof, soon they will be at the Bird House offering those hippies smallpox blankets.

  110. Quinn

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:26

    Whether you believe this an issue as extreme as a ā€œright to housingā€, the fact remains that there are long standing legal concepts underlying a property owners responsibilities. As carl stated New York common law always contained a ā€œuse it or lose itā€ provision called ā€œadverse possessionā€. The theory goes that if someone ā€œsquatsā€ on your property for ten years and you fail to take the initiative to regain control of your property, you lost it because it is better for society to have someone use property as opposed to letting it rot. Here ten years could have meant this house was lost and more dangerous than it was. They sought permission from the Court. The owner didn’t step up to the plate so the City felt it was in the better interests of the City to hand it over to someone who would do the building and its surrounding neighbor some good. Have some of you missed the point that THE OWNER DID NOT STEP UP even once it was cited in Housing Court? So it was sit for how many more years before the City could then place it on a demolition list so the neighbors could look at it and deal with it for the next how many years? Many other posts on this cite have talked about how it is near impossible to buy properties from the City once it is in their possession.

    You and I have responsibilities for our property too. (Theoretically) you pay your taxes and keep your property up or you lose it through a legal process. The post in fact said they obtained this property through a legal process eventually. Maybe this is less anarchism as it is Machiavellism.

  111. sbrof

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:28

    mmjazz, no one knows if they have or don't have jobs. That was an assumption made by someone earlier.

    I assume that since they went through the trouble to get legal title of the property they must have income, considering they know they will have to start paying property taxes etc. If they really wanted to be freeloaders they would have left the property in limbo.. waited until someone finally forced them out and moved on to another property.

  112. NorPark

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:29

    It appears that these fine folks have a group on Myspace, 'Bird House Inner Circle'. The appear to be fine citizens that are and will continue to be a asset to the city of buffalo.

    http://groups.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=groups.groupProfile&groupID=105978588&MyToken=50f46425-52fd-4e1e-925b-aae58510e7b2

  113. benfranklin

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:31

    Between you and me Rise....there's little chance this system will leave me penniless. Why so? Because I paid the price to get where I wanted to go, and didn't need to steal from others. Speaking of shooting (sbrof)... if I had a gun, and they were in my property... bet a lot of you would like to sit on that jury.

  114. NorPark

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:31

    http://groups.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=groups.groupProfile&groupID= 105978588&MyToken=50f46425-52fd-4e1e-925b-aae58510e7b2

  115. NorPark

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:34

    Blog from their myspace group page, some good intentions at least, others...

    "Posted: Apr 28, 2007 2:37 PM Well I was talking with Andrew last night and we seem to think Friday June 1st could be the first night. But I feel like there will be a lot going on around June and July and I wanted to have it a little earlier in May but I think we have all decided on June 1st on.

    So far I want to do pvc flute making and the all pvc wind orchestra one day, and maybe an urban plant hike with vinegar making and tasting at the end of it another day.

    And I want to exploit diy fest to do one big house project like dig out another section of the pool and wheel barrel it to Junior's house across the street and maybe get a 24 foots ladder and try and get one person to prep and prime a window and another to actually paint it a funny color, every which one a different one you know? Or reflooring the ripped sections of the kitchen and pantry. All we need is enough plywood to level it, and we have the self-adhesive tile too. If each of us housies could bottom-line some of that shit we could really do a lot with minimal work from us and a lot of voluntary participation, I bet people would want to help even.

    Tim is talked to Ethan alot about it and they discussed maybe having each day at a different place so to bring the community together. I don't like the sound of it, and besides how is everyone gonna get around except for with bikes, so we better get buildin'. It isn't wise to drive the van too much, with no insurance and registration that expires in '07 we are pushing it. A mass arrest in the van with weed or some one falling off a 32 foot ladder into the pavement would surely taint my good time.

    **I think having the fest at the house solely during the day is a good central area with housing for many and we could have days from 11 or 12 to 4-5well thats only 3 1 and a half hour workshops maybe we only need to, anyways... ***WE COULD STILL HAVE SHOWS AT A DIFFERENT HOUSE EVERY NIGHT. 1/3 to us, 1/3 to their house and 1/3 to bands maybe. We are fund raising for our 2 year anniversary right? Also this helps us during the work week, to not have a show every night, all into the night and turning all the neighbors against us. We need to give them a heads up about our 92 year anniversary bash so they can expect a week long fest and a hundred sketchies.

    Also we have little to no money in the house account right now, and we need to pay the water bill and the sewer tax STILL (I don't really know but happened but now we only have over three hundred dollars and are on the verge of being broke in a crisis quick). This is a dangerous position to hold a festival in, unless we make a million dollars. The reason I bring up money is because if we had alot of it, the house could buy people shit they want for the workshops, like if we had a conduit bender and aluminum conduit (for electrical housing) we could build a bike cart with nuts and bolts alone.

    I just realized how much I wrote and I am starting a private group to talk about this openly while we are all out of town. ANd I am gonna post some of this up there.

    Good luck and wear sun screen, it is 77 degrees in Porter County Indiana where I am now, whew."

  116. kjthomas77

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:37

    as more and more of the ideology of this group is uncovered from the rolling thunder article and posted here for all of us to see, what i have to wonder is this: if these guys really operate in such a way that is a clear manipulation of the system, albeit working, corrupt, or ethically sound, what is to say that they will not continue to do so? what's to say they really will pay taxes? or pay for housing fines, should they be levied? this myspace page of theirs could just be a front...

    i find the tidbit exposing their MO with the local block club extremely telling and very concerning...

  117. rpmcmurphy

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:37

    sbrof brings sanity back again, thank you.

    These people are living in community. You know communing, something that the vast majority of us have no clue about and are obviously scared of. That is sad when a group of people decide to live in communal relationship with their surroundings (or as much as they can within our society) and the soulless detached masses shout protest. This is native land, stolen through violence and genocide, and appears to be a more appropriately used than casino's and other neo-industrial developments. Our region has been decimated by the capitalist machine and spit out yet the majority appear to want another round of environmental and self-destruction.

  118. sbrof

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:38

    If they were in your property and you had a gun you would do something this owner doesn't do.. Care. That is fine, go trigger happy. The whole idea here the owners have totally and utterly abandoned this place. it meant nothing more than a discarded McDonald's cup to them. It was destined to be nothing more than a BJ shack and an eventual bon-fire. Who knows maybe even the final resting place for a fireman or policemen.

    These people took the property and are at least attempting to do something with it. They might fail, they might succeed.

  119. RisingDamp666

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:38

    Some kids get into the communal thing and now you're racking your shotguns? Way to go Buffalo! It really IS 1971!

  120. NBJOHN

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:39

    wow - didn't know this subject would generate so many comments

  121. Martin

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:44

    knit one...does this beat number of posts for the gates condo building or the casino? [it has been a fun day though on an otherwise dreary cold afternoon]...pearl two

  122. exnihilo

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:45

    Wow . . .

    I am really surprised at the level of vitriol that has been expressed in relation to this thread. One of the things that I have gotten out of the ensuing conversation is that infantile mudslinging and extreme, hyperbolic reactions are not confined to one side of the political spectrum or the other. Both sides of the argument – those that have painted the ā€œBird House Collectiveā€ as heroes and those that have labeled them ā€œcultistsā€, have done little to convince me either way; thus I am forced (gasp) to form my own opinion . . .

    The original homeowner (regardless if he/she is a millionaire playboy/girl from England or a dirt poor octogenarian in Topeka, Kansas dying alone of cancer) is a criminal thorough the act of neglect.

    The ā€œBird Houseā€ squatters are criminals through an act of theft.

    Home ownership in this country is not a right, but a hard earned privilege.

    First off, I am not going to address the character of the folks living in this home directly since I do not know them personally, but the fact that they took a property by force, which they proudly and freely admit in the Rolling Thunder article, is illegal and sheds a pall upon all of their subsequent acts to ā€œbeautifyā€ the property and become legitimate homeowners.

    In addition, the article in the aforementioned Rolling Thunder and the manner in which they paint themselves as modern day Robin Hoods and heroes warring against the machine while simultaneously outlining their personal socio-political manifesto speaks volumes about their true intentions and motivations for capturing this property. This was not an altruistic act to help a blighted neighborhood and beautify an old home destined for the scrap heap; this was a politically charged and self-aggrandizing act with no other purpose but to serve their needs, wants, and desires. They did not want to pay rent or to go through the established system to attain a home. They simply wanted the foundation of the ā€œAmerican Dreamā€ – a roof over their heads – on their terms and their terms only.

    Can I achieve hero status too because I lay awake at night wondering how I am going to make ends meet and provide for my children? Can I achieve hero status since I have sacrificed a lot of what my cohorts have enjoyed to further my wife’s education and ensure that my children are eating well and getting the things they need in order to grow up strong and healthy? Can I achieve hero status since I am attempting, by begging, borrowing, and busting my ass to buy a place I and my family can call home?

    I don’t think so.

    Then again, I don’t think I would be lauded as a hero of Urban Renewal if I moved my family out of our shitty rental into an abandoned house on the West Side that I have long been admiring, and then, through a legal war of attrition, attained ownership of said property, like our friends at the ā€œBird Houseā€. Even if I started, with the little means I have, to make superficial improvements, in the real world, or at least that which exists outside of the Candy Land cal ā€œBROā€, I would be jailed, my children taken away, and I would be crucified in the media as a ne’er-do-well and negligent father.

    On a more serious note, as STEEL pointed out, there is a program in place to assist those individuals interested in navigating the long, and unnecessarily complex, legal channels of Urban Homesteading. I have posted in the past about the success of this program in other cities and the manner through which it could be a success here in Buffalo. If the gentlemen at the ā€œBird Houseā€ truly are interested in making Buffalo, and the world, a beautiful place, then they should be willing to expend just as much legal energy they did on securing their own personal ā€œpiece of the pieā€ by adding to the efforts to shore up Buffalo’s Urban Homesteading program and put homes back in the hands of those that need them most – the residents of this city. They should also be willing, by virtue of their personal experience, assist in lobbying for stricter laws to punish those that would allow their properties to deteriorate through neglect by revoking ownership and placing those homes back on the market through a clear, simple, and well advertised Urban Homesteading program (or offering those properties to the current residents of those homes through the same program).

    Sadly, based on their views expressed in Rolling Thunder, I don’t see this happening, which, in the end, makes them just as criminal as the absentee homeowner they wrestled the deed of this home from and spells long term doom for their ā€œeffortsā€ to be good neighbors.

    Let the negative feedback begin . . .

  123. RisingDamp666

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:50

    The Homeowner as Cultural Hero? I'm not buying your book, exnihilo, it's too worn at the spine.

  124. Martin

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:52

    well said exnihilo...very well put. damn, dropped a stitch...

  125. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:57

    "A stitch in time saves whine"...eh, Martin?

  126. RustBelter

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 15:58

    Hello all. I don't come to give an opinion but mere facts to straighten u pthe specifics of this situation, but not to detract from the debate of property rights vs. blighted neighborhood. My names Tim Robson, and to get the story straight, a few points of contention I ran into while reading were a.) Taxes b.) Utilities and c.) Work to be done/costs to be covered. As far as the taxes go, immeadiately after moving in, we paid of the 4,800 dollars in the standing back taxes, user fees and overdue water bills, and sine then, taxes have still been kept up on. Utilities-At our high point, we had water, electric, gas, phone, and internet. Since then we have rid our selves of gas, in hopes of finding cheaper more reliable means of heat, and our internet and phone out of lack of use. We still have electric, for water tanks, lights and some heat, and water. We're working on rain-water collection for our garden(s?), collected in fifty-five gallon drums. As far as our "freeloading, thieving ways-just trying to live free and not have to pay for anything", that's not entirely the point. The t-shirt printing and music recording, and especially the garden, are not money-making operations. Theyre simply examples of us trying to find ways to do what we love sustainably. They're for experience, not for cash. In addition, everyone involved in the project as it stands has at least a part-time job, and we've already aastarted pooling for our sring time repairs. And like someone said before, I am using this website to try and garner some forms of support or advice. I'm only twenty and have taken on a pretty hefty resonsibility. So like it said in the article, if anyone wants to, getting a hold of me is encouraged. I'd love to talk to you more~Tim p.s. there are no religious or other cult like attitudes, but i did think that was pretty funny. No guns either.

  127. Martin

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:01

    lol risingdamp666...

  128. exnihilo

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:02

    It was not my intention, RisingDamp666, to portray the homeowner as a ā€œCultural Heroā€, I was simply trying to illustrate the absurdity of their manifesto in Rolling Thunder when place within the context of the ā€œnormalā€ manner in which one secures a home to call their own.

    We’re cool, though. I’ll buy your book since I am already guilty of quoting some of your wittier responses in conversations I have had.

  129. sbrof

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:05

    oh man.. You mean they:

    have jobs... pay taxes and (gasp) don't like spending money on utilities..

    There must be something wrong with them. (witches?)

  130. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:11

    Thanks for your patronage, exnihilo, but again, what, aside from "the right to skateboard anywhere" could anything in any "manifesto" written by a bunch of stoned out kiddie hippies could possibly threaten the social contract? And what about "Rolling Thunder" gives these ideas gravitas and imprimatur? It's just a prdictable bunch of dreamy screeds that will be embarrassing these kids well into their golden years. Blow it off.

  131. exnihilo

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:16

    Tim Robson –

    Thank you for posting here and providing additional information on the means by which you attained this property. It takes real gonies of steel to walk into a conversation that is so clearly slanted against your efforts and dubious, at best, when it comes to your personal character. Believe me, the intention of my previous post was not to call into question your true intent, nor to sully the strides forward you and your friends have made at securing this property; however, I am at a loss to reconcile the views expressed in Rolling Thunder and those expressed here.

    Since I do not live in the neighborhood, ultimately I cannot and do not have a legitimate position from which to weigh the value of your efforts or the positive effects of your presence in that neighborhood, but since Federico, who apparently lives across the street from you does, posted about the positive impact you have had, all I can say is bravo.

    Just out of curiosity, though, how do you rectify the clear contrast to the extreme view expressed in Rolling Thunder and that you have shown on your MySpace page and here in your post?

  132. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:24

    "If the gentlemen at the ā€œBird Houseā€ truly are interested in making Buffalo, and the world, a beautiful place, then they should be willing to expend just as much legal energy they did on securing their own personal ā€œpiece of the pieā€ by adding to the efforts to shore up Buffalo’s Urban Homesteading program and put homes back in the hands of those that need them most – the residents of this city."

    The thread in a nutshell--great job exnilio... well thought out.

    Who owns the property? How do we get a free house out of this? Why can't we take this part time job money and buy a house like everyone else? At least the landlord tried to provide housing for people. I don't know the story about abuse on their part. Why doesnt the bank or whoever owns the property sell it to you for market price? Then,I would say great--pay the back taxes and have at it.

  133. exnihilo

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:24

    Believe me, RisingDamp666, I can relate to that ā€œembarrassmentā€ bit about extreme political tirades made in one’s youth when viewed through the lens of living a bit. The only reason that I keep beating this horse is that, up until the point Mr. Robson elected to post here, everything based on his efforts had to be viewed through the scant evidence available, which, unfortunately, consisted of a ā€˜zine akin to the toilet paper my college friends and I churned out and submitted to Factsheet5 back in the day and some incoherent posts of suspect truth.

  134. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:31

    Right, exnihilo....so what does that tell you?

  135. Texpat10

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:35

    We truly are a desperate bunch if we place the weight of bringing back this city, as so many seem to want to do here, on a bunch of people that 1) illegally squatted in a house 2) were smart enough to legally acquire the house through adverse posession 3) are stupid enough to admit publicly that they drive an uninsured and unregistered van, smoke weed, undermine block clubs and 4) have only $300 between them. Get real. Note, there are no personal judgements here (hippies, gay, environmentalist native american whatever). This is just realism plain and simple. I don't live in this neighborhood. If the neighbors are happy with this and think this is the way to go god bless 'em. All I can say is don't get too attached to the new neighbors because with only $300 between them it won't be long before the city owns this place.

  136. exnihilo

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:43

    RisingDamp666 – probably that, despite the volume of posts here, that this collective and the hullabaloo surrounding it, like most things, are as ephemeral as a fart in the wind.

  137. Martin

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:47

    LOL EXNIHILO...on that note I am heading home as i got jack s**t done today and might as well finish it off with a martini or 3.

  138. RisingDamp666

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:49

    Jesus, Texpat10, it's ONE house. You should be more alarmed by an incursion of termites in all the others.

    ...and you're right, exnihilo, although I think of it as more of a delightful light breeze.

  139. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:51

    Amen, Martin. Texpat 10: you speak the truth.

  140. OldBird

    4 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:51

    Well, what have we done to deserve this, my son?

    BenFranklin, you seem to have never read your namesake. Shame on you for trashing his good reputation - he was a bawd, father to illegitemate children too many to count, and a brilliant scientist, racanteur, and experimenter. You are a blast of lake-effect cold air in comparison. GO HOME. Read something besides your own tripe.

    RisingDamp666 - loved your mis-quote from Poor Richard's Almanac - "A stitch in time saves whine"... BF no doubt missed the allusion.

    Here's another from that other Franklin:

    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. "

    May Tim Robson have the durable safety afforded every other citizen and homeowner. He is a better neighbor than was there before, by the testimony of those who posted here with firsthand knowledge. Congratulations on your new house, Boo.

  141. maxwelltielman

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 16:53

    This is AWESOME.

    And everybody really needs to calm down.

  142. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 17:00

    If only our 'collective' farts were ephemmeral.

  143. benfranklin

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 17:24

    Well Oldbird, good to hear from you again, nono matter what name you choose to use. Would be interesting to hear you argue that property rights mean nothing....oh wait, we've had the debate before, with you trashing Adam Smith's invisible hand. Perhaps you can start by helping them fight their assement...."what did you pay for the property?"...

    Welcome back Oldbird, never being one to rise above the fray, I was counting down the seconds til your return.

  144. carl

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 18:52

    this will be my last post on this topic...

    most of the trendy residential neighborhoods in Manhattan were first settled by squatters in the 1970's and early 1980's, and look at those places now! this is where the term residential LOFT comes from, with people squatting in industrial loft buildings. they largely replaced the pimps and drug dealers who ran those areas previously. ie. soho, dumbo, meatpacking, Greenwich village, Spanish harlim, lower east side etc.... some of the original squats from that period are still going strong, albeit legally.

    Liza Minno reciently wrote in L magazine... ā€œI lived around the corner from the squatters on East 13th,ā€ wrote journalist Luc Sante in a 1995 New York Times editorial, ā€œand in the late 1970s that stretch, between Avenues A and B, was one of the most forbidding streets in the area — an alley of dope storefronts, muggers, rapists and ad hoc garbage dumps. The squatters changed all that, throwing out the drug dealers and chasing away the creeps without any official help. By 1983 or so, the street was reasonably safe.ā€

    http://www.thelmagazine.com/5/3/NYCProfiles/feature1.cfm

  145. davvid

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 18:53

    I bet they are some very cool people. probably ALOT cooler than benfranklin! yowza!

  146. fredrico

    6 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 18:56

    WOW !!! What a bunch of misinformed comments. I can't believe how many people will "guess" what is going on at the BIRD HOUSE and spew their negative reactions to their unsubstantiated totally incorrect guesses about what is going on there. Someone even commented that the neighbors resent them and don't want them there which is so completely the opposite of what the real situation is. I am across the street from this house and I can tell you:

    1. we - the neighbors all wrote and signed letters of support for the court to review because we felt these people - especially Tim - made a very positive impact to our street and we wanted them to stay in the neighborhood. 2. They are not squatters anymore- they legally own the house now. 3. They do believe in dumpster diving and not wasting what everyone throws away -so what!! 4. They don't steal, sell drugs, have a pit bull fighting ring going on, have guns at the house and will shoot you if you look at them the wrong way and guess what people - THAT IS WHAT THE OTHER NEIGHBORS IN THIS AREA ARE DOING!! I know from experience !!!

  147. Hoss

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 19:01

    "SQUAT OR ROT". That was the mantra in NYC back in the late 80's.

    Me, I'd much rather see squatters than the absentee rotters.

    If you look at what happened to the lower east side of NYC, you'd think developers would be funding squatter movements by now. The squatters attract the artists, the artists attract the hipsters, the hipsters attract the yuppies, and the yuppies attract the developers. Historically, squatting can even be viewed as the front line of gentrification. Though don't tell Peter Missing that.

    Too bad people didn't get this worked up over real estate flippers, corrupt politicos, or the current state of the health insurance industry.

    You go Birdhouse. Just be good respectful humans, and you shouldn't have any problems. Hell, you might even set an example, and start a movement here.

    Best of luck with your new home.

  148. ChocolateShake

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 19:14

    Squatters (homeless) had relatively little to the rebirth of Manhattan. The rebirth of Alphabet City/East Village came about because the city cracked down on quality of life issues and a roaring economy that was associated with the dot com boom.

    More often than not, squatters (homeless) WERE the drug dealers, hookers and junkies. When they cleared the squaters (homeless) out of Tompkins Square Park, gentrification begin in that neighborhood. In addition the relaxation of rent control regulations invited private investment back in that part of the city. Ask anyone who either grew-up or lived in the City during that period and they would tell you that upfront.

  149. ChocolateShake

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 19:24

    The Bowery safe in 1983?... LOL Spoken like a true Buffalonian.

    Ask a New Yorker and they would tell you different.

  150. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 19:42

    Carl, Ive never made a threat to you or anyone else here, and do not hide behind a thing here, my name is Jaye, now go untangle your thong and relax my friend...its all good in the hood

  151. rudr

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 19:45

    This group of kids (no disrespect meant - I'm old enough that they are kids to me) tracked down the previous owner, got his permission to live there and gave him their names and contact information. They shaped up the house, cleaned up the yard (including a debris-filled pool that was hardly a symbol of affluence) and paid the garbage fees. After constant, nearly continuous, contact with housing court (Judge up front - dignified fellow- knows a lot about the law) they obtained a legal deed. They paid the taxes (I could name elected official who haven't done that) and are working to repair the damage done while they were forced to vacate. They've introduced themselves to the neighbors and made a positive enough impact that the neighbors support their presence. They've been absolutely transparent about their intentions to care for the house despite limited means, and are trying to start endeavors that will be positive for themselves and others. Are they young, poor, scruffy and fiercely impatient with the system? Yes. Are they better than a rotting crackhouse? Oh, yes. Would you rather have a well-scrubbed family with the disposable income to call in the general contractors tomorrow? Sure. Go find them and ask if they're interested in living there. Remember, the kids tracked down the bank holding the lien, volunteered their information, and the bank (folks in suits- know a lot about money) agreed the place was worth no more than 15k, maybe nothing. Is it right to threaten guns and arson. No. Is it reasonable to label them Mansonites, cultists and kidnappers? Not even close to reasonable. Don't like the idea? Fine. Fix the system that leaves neighborhoods stuck with abandoned, decaying buildings (some owned by government entities) for years. Think maybe, just maybe, it could be a good thing? Stop in. Say hi. See and think before condemning.

  152. skarnath

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 19:52

    Facinating story - with a real moral dilemma. That's clearly why we are all reading & commenting. It was helpful to to have a neighbor (Fredrico) and Mr. Robson weigh in. Here are a few additional facts - available online with the city and county. Mr. Robson took title to 92 Bird (one of the best property descriptions in the city - "east corner of west") on 11/21/07 via a quit claim deed from Timothy, Brian & Patricia Starr for the sum of $1.00. The house was built in 1900, has 3314 sq. ft. and is currently assessed at $20,000. That's about 1/2 of the assessment on the house next door, which is significantly smaller.

    This part is pure SPECULATION - the Starrs walked away because the house was in such bad condition they couldn't rent it, and the liens far exceeded the market value. The out of town bank wasn't willing to negotiate with the Starrs. Mr. Robson moved in. The house ended up in housing court, and after a year or two Judge Nowak ran out of patience. He told the bank to either foreclose or discharge the mortgage, and he told the Starrs to either execute a quit claim deed (a deed which has no covenants - which basically says "whatever title I have, no matter how good or bad, you now have") or face a huge fine or jail. They quit-claimed the property to Mr. Robson.

    Next - a question - this is a huge house that will cost a small fortune to fix. A contractor spending $100/sq.ft. would spend over $300,000. A do-it-yourselfer buying the materials would spend $40/sq.ft. or $132,000. The market value post-rehab is likely to be under $100,000. How likely is it that Mr. Robson & friends can pull this off? They may well live there and do small things to keep the house habitable, but it's highly unlikely they will do something substantial. Maybe they will see this as a challenge - I would love to be wrong.

    And last - Buffalo has close to 25,000 vacant housing units as a result of population decline. Now matter how much we improve the process by which Mr. Robson took title, it is so ponderous, haphazard and inefficient that it has almost no value as a model. There is a place for a substantial urban homesteading program in Buffalo, but the city will need to commit serious, talented staff and significant money to make it work. In my 30 years in community development, I have never seen a willingness on the part of the city to do that. ("Maybe they will see this as a challenge - I would love to be wrong.")

  153. hamp

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 20:08

    Congratulations. These young people are on their way to saving a house. This is sustainable development at the grass roots level. Sometimes you have to work outside the system to get things done. Don't stop.

  154. tonyarmani

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 20:13

    so they get stranded in Buffalo, (re)build their own tree fort, grow their own food, and are very religious? what is this, the East Side's version of Swiss Family Robinson?

  155. joey

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 20:21

    These squatters are left over descendants of inhabitants from the 60's in the SAN FRANCISCO BAY area. They slowly migrated from California to start their own commune. As I was walking by one night..I thought I saw Jimmi Hendrix standing on the porch...I'm not sure if he had a hammer or guitar in his hand. Standing next to him was what looked like Janis Joplin AND Jim Morrison...they were either sharing a bottle of water or ..it coulda been a BONG! SCARY things happen when you face the unknown. Perhaps the Mult dwelling bldg insp should pay them a visit, and analyze the situation and the law dept should dictate whether this building is on the up and up. Do they have insurance, utilities..if not how can they legally inhabit this building.? There's more discovery to be made before A FINAL opinion can be introduced as to whether this is good or bad for the area.

  156. IamMe

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 20:33

    I thing the term is Freegians. A group of people that consume as little as possible and can be considered as environmentalists . I have met most of them at one time or another though out the years. They may smell at times but they are harmless. They live this way by choice not by fait.

  157. mmjazz

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 20:45

    Nobody said, or I missed it, that they have the deed to the property. Funny how the correct details change the viewpoint. My apologies to the people in this house. It seems as though they have gone through legal channels if this recent information is accurate. Good for them if they obtained the deed, paid taxes and are doing what they can--that changes everything. I thought squatting meant you didnt do all this? Are they squatters or not? The whole story got everyone off track.

  158. carl

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 20:46

    "FREEGAN, we eat your scrap, but wont buy your crap!"

    sorry, couldn't resist,

    im done now.

  159. Hoss

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 21:10

    Chocolateshake. I was there during that era, that's why I speak of it. That's why I'm telling it like I saw it "upfront". Granted, there are many perspectives out there, and cause and effect can be attributed to a zillion things. But to clarify a couple points...

    Squatters are not homeless first of all.

    The dot come ponzi scam didn't happen until mid/late 90's. The gentrification of that neighborhood started well before all that Giuliani "quality of life/make way for Disneyland" BS came into play as well. The riots of '88 were about 6 years before most people even heard of the internet.

    Tomkins Square was full of homeless, I'll give you that. The relationship with local activists and sqatters was one of support for the rights of the homeless who were being evicted from the park during this period of intense gentrification. This began during the Koch administration.

    But what do you consider the 'rebirth' of the east village anyway? When The Gap opened a location on St. Marks?

  160. fredrico

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 21:32

    They started out squatting - but they were paying the utility bills (they did have electricity and water)and were fighting to become legal homeowners of the property throughout their stay.

    They fought to buy the property for a couple years and now are the owners of the house and no longer squatters there.

    As their neighbor I will say there are some of their beliefs I don't approve of but overall they have brought increased safety to that corner, have been kind and supportive to the neighbors and have not hurt anyone (which in that neighborhood is a really BIG deal). They are trying to save the house. Before they came- there were some horrific drug dealings and shootings going on at that corner (and is still going on big time on the next block down from us). It's funny that people don't get as fired up about that.

  161. reflip

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 22:13

    fredrico,

    You hit the nail on the head. It is sad that, collectively, this city is not angry about the absentee landlords and abandoned houses. I wish I knew how to fix that. However, based on this thread, my only idea is that we need more of these pseudo-collectives. Not because quasi-legit squatting is or is not morally and legally sound, but rather because it has the potential tol 1) stabilize dangerous properties and 2) get people talking passionately about a vital issue to the future of the city and region.

    exnihilo,

    You said: "First off, I am not going to address the character of the folks living in this home directly since I do not know them personally, but the fact that they took a property by force, which they proudly and freely admit in the Rolling Thunder article, is illegal and sheds a pall upon all of their subsequent acts to ā€œbeautifyā€ the property and become legitimate homeowners."

    I like your deliberate and well reasoned posts, so I ask merely out of curiousity:

    Philosphically, if their taking a property "by force" negates any good intentions or effects, do you feel the same way about this country? It is well documented that we took this land by force - "we" being the United States of America as a political entity - and we celebrate that fact every July 4th. We believe we took it from the British rightly, but by force nonetheless, and of course we blatantly disregarded our own treaties with Native American tribes and took their land (something the British did not do, actually). Does this negate our subsequent good actions and intentions and cast a dark shadow over the history and current status of our country? If so, philosophically the "American Dream" is based on immoral takings. To quote KRS-ONE, "there can never really be justice on stolen land."

    As for that era being different from our own, I would argue that property rights were more meaningful and important to people in the 18th century than they are today. Back then, the question fomented revolution. Today, the only flames come from message boards and people horde property only to let it fallow and rot in the absence of a profit margin.

    General comment,

    On a long enough timeline, the concept of property becomes very fluid (heck, we once considered human beings property). Placing property rights above all other considerations might be worshipping a false idol.

  162. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 23:06

    Unfortunately, we can only do the right thing moving forward. Past wrongs doesn't negate anything good we might do in the future. Hell, if those were the rules, why leave the house?

    "Back then, the question fomented revolution. Today, the only flames come from message boards and people horde property only to let it fallow and rot in the absence of a profit margin. General comment, On a long enough timeline, the concept of property becomes very fluid (heck, we once considered human beings property. Placing property rights above all other considerations might be worshipping a false idol."

    Why is it bad to own something? Buffalo economics is already mired in repressive socialism--we don't need the reincarnation of Karl Marx. This whole thing of the rich people are out to get us must stop. We have laws now that help restrict absentee owners. If we make it impossible for the "filthy rich" to buy anything, Buffalo will not recover these amazing properties that exist. Squatters may provide a moral victory, but this cant be sustained long term. Instead of blaming people who do well in life, become someone who does well in life. There is a lot of pride in ownership and the loyalty to an area that comes with it--that's what BRO is all about. Staking a claim in Buffalo.

  163. daisy13

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 23:32

    by the way the rolling thunder article was written by someone who no longer is involved with the bird house, and is no longer even in town as far as i know, i think they went south. so one persons radical anarchist viewpoint should not be prescribed to the whole groups viewpoint. i remeber there being alot of angry people when that got published, part of why the kid left town, or so he said

  164. reflip

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 28th 2008, 23:39

    mmjazz,

    I acknowledge gray areas. I own a home in Rochester. I was responding to specific points in other posts.

    In THIS case, I think the squatters have the right idea. If they were squatting so that they could sell drugs, do drugs, pimp and commit violence then I would say they are wrong. But that just isn't the case. Hence, when people try to break this down into some kind of easily explainable core philosophy, I have to question the basis of that philosophy. This doesn't have to be a "for squatters or against them" situation. I think if we are to move forward we must deal with that reality.

    Realistic options:

    1) Kick them out and let the house go back to being abandoned.

    This places the rights of the original owner who neglected the property above the public good. And, clearly that doesn't make sense in this case. It's not communism. It is common sense.

    2) Let them stay.

    This is where people disagree. The argument against it is basically that it tramples on the property rights of owners. I don't think that is valid. And I don't think that our society is going to crumble from its very core because of it.

    This country was born out of a philosophy that supported "certain inalienable rights." The right to property ownership is arguably (debatably, not conclusively, etc.) inalienable as it pertains to the "pursuit of happiness." The right to buy and sell any particular piece of property, however, is alienable. Hence my statement that placing property above ALL ELSE in your value schema is "worshiping a false idol."

  165. pegger

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 02:43

    I wouldn't underestimate this crew! They can handle Housing Court and the bank! I would call them industrious and intelligent! Their one mistake? Going public.

  166. RisingDamp666

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 02:49

    SoHo was the creation of squatters. Some paid a 'commercial' rent, but most just occupied the abandoned factory buildings in Lower Manhattan in the '60s skirting city ordinances against occupying non-residential buildings. They made improvements knowing that at any time they could be legally driven out. Eventually they won status as legal inhabitants and later, owners. Did that neighborhood suffer as a result? As noted in the post, there is a process that would be daunting for an ordinary crackhead or prostitute. I don't know if these kids will make it all the way through but it is a singular and interesting story. So don't worry, nmjazz, your mortgage is safe, keep paying.

  167. Quaker

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 03:00

    Let's say it all together now...WHO CARES!?!?!?! Maybe if the people who write on this site spent their time working and being productive instead of sifting through this inconsequential garbage Buffalo would experience a minute degree of economic success. Do people think their opinion matters on this issue?

    Shoot. Now I'm a hypocrite.

    "I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg

  168. Colin

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 03:02

    1. I spent a week travelling to protests with one of the original Bird House guys back in '03. He was sweet and harmless, though he needed to brush his teth.

    2. Given the well documented dificulties that people have had with the city real estate office, couldn't squatting be seen as a viable neighborhood renewal/protest tactic? If the city can't manage to sell properties to folks who want to fix them up, why shouldn't those citizens simply take them? Even it it didn't work, it would pressure the city into reformig how it does its real estate business.

  169. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 03:13

    It's a thought, Colin, but I think the city would be unmoved, and there would be an ugly backlash. You just have to keep this stuff on the down low and behave yourselves. I don't want to see any of you get hurt.

  170. pegger

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 06:30

    Come to think of it, has anyone considered that these young people are being underwritten by others? Their colorfulness (and all that entails) might indicate that they are not native to Buffalo at all! Look how some of us find this all disturbing. As cities re-urbanize, all forms of diversity manifest themseves. Part of the magic that follows is a new sort of neo tolerance that trascends cultural, ethnic, and racial barrriers. The yare the barriers Buffalo has historically dealt with. Perhaps this motley group signifies that the big change we all have been feel ing in the air is now underway. Time has arrived today. Let' give tham some support!

  171. westsidemike

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 08:43

    A couple additional points...I personally met with some neighbors who were less-than enthused with the occupants of this house about three years ago. Loud music, drugs, parties and other complaints I can't recall.

    The only reason they stayed as long as they did was because of one of Buffalo housing activists who helped them try to navigate the system and take the property legally through the courts. Apparently it didn't work and I saw the house boarded up last year.

    In December I met the supposed deed holder, who I found to be as arrogant as they appear to be. When I asked him about how the above-mentioned person tried to help them, he wasn't interested in discussing it.

    I am all-for people buying an empty property and doing it the way I had to. There are plenty of very cheap houses in Buffalo that can be had even by people with little means. The problem is, someone has to work to pay the bills, or they'll be out on the street again, and this time they won't be going back.

  172. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 09:24

    RisingDamp666, I need to know more about my safe mortgage. Are we saps for paying them?

  173. WholeLottaJibbaJabbah

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 10:09

    Such fear, such prejudice such hate. Welcome to the neighborhood.

  174. mmjazz

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 10:48

    No kidding Jibba Jabba...

  175. sbrof

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 12:22

    welcome to Buffalo, where people think they are tolerant until they are faced with something they find different. The mentality of the region is still one of racial and socio-economic rifts. I can't count the number of times I still hear people talk about.."colors," "spooks," or "those people" you don't want them in your neighborhood. They are not safe. The only difference from when I was a kid and today is they whisper.

    You would think it's still 1960 if you didn't have a calendar. Maybe it isn't quite that bad anymore but this group opens up a lot of the problems that really are holding us as a region back. When it comes to spending money, supporting the city, safety "concerns" these deep rooted feelings come to the surface. Until we can realize that we are all economically bound and in this together. We are never going to solve the core problems of poverty and poor education that blight our area. Sorry if slightly off topic but 'fear,' whether justified or not, goes to the root of this and many other conversations.

  176. ChocolateShake

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 12:43

    I think the Richardson Complex's absentee landlord is not taking proper care of it. I have therefor descended upon the building to become the owner through adverse possession. I will generate money through selling grilled cheese sandwhiches to the bands that frequent Allentown. I should have millions by years end. My goal is to form a sexual collective that will attract people from the four corners of the globe. If you are interested in joining or if you would like to make a very generous donation, please email me at BigBuffaloBone@excite.com

    I have made a video airing my intent.

    view it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxq6IgkYA50&feature=related

    Cheers!

  177. mmjazz

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 13:23

    I agree that the 'quiet racism' of suburbanites is part of the cause of economic strife. I don't know of any other city where going downtown is such a 'threat to safety' there are dangerous cities, but you are smart and work during the day etc; over the course of years, these attitudes contributed to businesses leaving. Even Mcdonalds had to close on Main Street(if i remember right) For many cities, going downtown is a fun excursion to bookstores, hip places to shop etc. My dad in Tonawanda just tells me I am going to get shot if I go down there. This "white flight" attitude help to create these economic shifts. (probably an obvious point) I appreciate people being up front about these issues-it's the only way that we can overcome it. Unfortunately, its so deeply rooted. It's like trying to convince a 14 teen year old terrorist that they should apply for student loans so that they can get a liberal education and be free. People are ingrained with these beliefs to the point where they are difficult to eradicate. It will take Canisus, UB, and Buffalo State grads and other creative young people to think differently and embrace cultural diversity in a way that's, as someone said, intertwined and symbiotic. It will be a long road, but progress is possible.

  178. fredrico

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 13:24

    Dear ChocolateShake- I know your comment is meant to be funny on a Friday and I do think it is creative (and a little funny) but I do want to point out that there is a big difference between " not taking good care of a property" and totally abondoning it for 3 years. Not that that gives the right to others to come & take it - but keep in mind the new "occupants" did repeatedly try to buy the property. And - they took better care of it than the drug dealers that shot somebody in front of the house before they came. I don't think people realise what is really going on in that neighborhood because if they did - they would realise that the BIRD HOUSE is the least of our problems.

  179. mmjazz

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 13:36

    Fredrico,

    Thanks for putting things in perspective. From your point of view, I can understand this situation better and have more empathy. These folks seem to be resourceful enough to do things in a legal way, however. That was my point. From the standpoint of a neighborhood looking for stability, I can understand the notion of a squatter with good intentions. I know that everyone realizes that it is unfortunate that we have gotten to this point. But if you put yourself in the shoes of a homeowner in this area, it is completely understandable. I give you credit for being a part of a community of Buffalo that needs a renaissance--and having the courage to make a difference.

  180. fredrico

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 13:57

    To mmjazz-

    Thank you. I wish I could tell you what one of my days in this neighborhood is like (it's a new shock everyday).

    I hate that the freegans are sometimes looking for a free ride - but it is a comfort that they are there (for example ,in case someone tries to hurt me - they would help me in a second!!). They also helped me when I was asked to help an abondoned nursing pit bull dog (someone must have kept the puppies and threw her out). Some small children watched the dog wander in the fields- hungry - dirty- with her nipples hanging down -for a couple weeks until the small children went and got her & gave her to me. Having no where to put her I asked Tim and his Bird House friends to care for her till I could find a home - which they did without hesitation. Well I have gotten off subject here in a way. ( P.S. - the dog got adopted into a fabulous home and is doing quite well).

  181. OldBird

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 14:18

    Tim Robson's friends and family have indeed been supporting him in this venture, but he won't take our money. He was born and raised here in this city. He has secured for himself and his colleagues a dry place to sleep, a warm place to gather, and the best thing his parents could ask for: he is self-sufficient at 20 yrs old, living in his hometown, making his own way in life. skarnath's post citing the court documentation is brilliant, and spot on to the facts. The speculation was off only by the assumption that the purpose of this acquisition was at all related to the resale market-value of the house. Tim does not want to fix this place up to sell it off again. HE WANTS TO LIVE THERE, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, for as long as it remains feasible.

    It may yet come to pass that demolition is the last and only solution. If and when that happens, it will be him, not the city, not the fools complaining about him, not the rest of us, that will bear that burden, because he is NOT homeless, he is not hiding, and HIS NAME IS ON THE DEED. If you want to help him avoid that end, offer him your spare building supplies, bring him a can of paint, a box of caulking tubes, and some sandpaper. Then stick around and ask him what HE thinks of communism, he'll fill your ears and inspire your minds. His number's in the article. Read it. Demonstrate your support for him in person, not just online. Hope to see you there.

  182. KernwatchMN

    6 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 14:22

    fredrico:

    Thank you for introducing a note of sanity into all frenzied anonymous attacks on a group that has tried to help stabilize a troubled corner of a troubled neighborhood.

    West Avenue is one of the most flipped WS streets, as far-away speculators baldly attempt to profit from the death of a neighborhood. Yet there is little outrage about such blatant "criminality".

    I spoke to Tim Robson last evening, who sounded to be a decent & intelligent person, despite his unorthodox techniques. Although he gave his phone (716-491-7474), followed by all the (anonymous) venom on this thread, he had gotten only two phone calls. (including mine). I always give massivly more credit to those who act in public than to 'hooded snipers' . . . who too often have DONE nothing.

    The city's housing policy is in massive disarray, costing taxpayers $100's of millions annually, as low income home ownership plummets & poverty steadily deepens. The city has at least 25,000 housing vacancies & plans to spend $100 million over 5 years demolishing 5,000 of 10,000 vacant buildings. Meanwhile BMHA (city housing authority) is planing to spend $100's of millions demolishing & rebuilding 4 housing projects.

    The taxpayer cost of Robson's venture is next to nothing . . or nothing. Their 92 Bird is assessed for taxes at merely $20K despite being a huge 3314 sq ft with 3 baths, on an 88 X 100 lot (2 /12 times the typical WS lot).

    The house was heading for demolition, likely costing taxpayers $20K.

    "Conventional" housing strategies have failed miserably . . .perhaps Bflonians should tolerate "unconventional" approaches until proven worse than the dismal status quo.

    Richard Kern (in Mpls)

  183. Rebecca

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 14:35

    Manski – one of the legal ways to obtain property by adverse possession. In NYS it takes 10 years, so these folks did what was legal anyhow but took a 7 year shortcut.

    Astroman – It’s a great precedent. ā€œUse it or lose it.ā€ If you don’t use your property or maintain it, then someone else can come in and have it. There are lots of houses in Buffalo in which no ones lives and on which no one pays taxes. Why not let people live there? Why should everyone else have to pay for your neglect of a property when people without a home a ready and willing to move in and take care of the place?

    I met a bunch of the individuals two years ago. We were working together – oh yes, legitimate employment. At the time, some of there were or had recently been UB students. I’ve even been in the house. They told me about how they had paid the back taxes on the house so that they could move into it.

    I don’t see what the big deal is – they needed a place to live and this house was empty. Anyone is free to do the same thing and see what happens. Don’t sit around bitter because you paid money for your house. When I met them I thought, ā€œWow, this is so cool. I should do this.ā€ I didn’t because it’s a big hassle, a huge risk. Knowing this was an option, I went and bought a house, got a mortgage, and I pay taxes.

    Steel is right – no one is buying these houses and so the prices need to change. Many of the city owned houses have negative value. The city is supposed to sell them at value but hasn’t been paying anyone to take them on.

  184. buffalostan

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 14:57

    Well the next time I walk by the Darwin Martin house I think I'll pop in and say that it is mine.

  185. ChocolateShake

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 15:09

    The 'quiet racism' of suburbanites ???? C'mon people... is this going to turn into a stereotypical BRO suburbs are evil and the city is a paradise of progressive thought thread?

  186. mmjazz

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 15:39

    I don't think you can tackle the economic problems of Buffalo without taking on the inequites in schools and neighborhoods. For Buffalo, there is a correlation between this and race. Suburbs might not be evil, but they sure as hell get more developers there? Why is that?

  187. manski

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 16:31

    Rebecca - since you brought it up... in New York State part of adverse possession is claim of right, which means that the person in possession believed that they were the rightful owner when they took possession. I think that had it gone to court they would have had a hard time proving that.

    I'm not going to repeat info from previous posts, but with all of the circumstances around this particular case it looks like the judge made the correct decision that was best for the property and the neighborhood. I was just curious whether they had contacted the owner to try and purchase the property before they broke in and took possession.

    Quite an interesting case that touches some serious issues this city faces and has provoked a (for the most part) intelligent debate.

  188. wizardofza

    3 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 17:15

    I think the moral of the story should be that it's certainly a positive thing that a few people have found value in something that mainstream society has abandoned and tossed to the wolves.

    The unorthodox methods used in acquiring this house all too well shows how screwed up the housing situation is in this city. This is all the reason why the city needs to make it even easier to legally squat in neglected properties via the urban homesteading program as mentioned above. Give away houses for $1 to people who are sincere in turning an abandoned house into an actual home. A house is not really worth 20K if you can't get someone to buy it for that much.

  189. skarnath

    2 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 18:36

    Why does this story have legs? Because the problem of vacant houses - with all the negative associations, including arson, drugs, crime - hits us all in the face every day, and causes us to doubt all of the good things we desparately want to believe about Buffalo and its resurrection. Save our houses & our heritage. Despite neglect, these houses have stood the test of time, and can provide a home for families yet to come. Tear down these houses - they are a blight on our neighborhood, and an invitation to arsonists, drug dealers and criminals. In some crazy way, between yesterday & today, this house, and these kids have become a metaphor for the problem of vacant houses, and our conflict with ourselves over what to do with them.

    One final observation - although the comments started 2 to 1 negative, somewhere along the way the pattern changed. My count - 80 positive comments, 51 negative comments, and 58 neutral (including unrelated) comments. I think there is more tolerance and understanding than some of the commenters recognize. Every expert in every field of endeavor was once a beginner. Maybe these beginners will become expert homeowners. You never know - it could happen...

  190. mmjazz

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 19:15

    I completely changed my view. If this kind of development edges out crime and stablizes neighboorhoods, I am willing to listen. As you point out skarnath, it is a metaphor. With the current state of this neighborhood, something special is needed. Did someone say a case study was done in NYC on this trend? It would be interesting to note the poaitive impact on neighborhoods. I think we had a problem because initially it seemed that people were taking advantage of the situation and we didnt know a deed had been signed etc. If that's true, its quite different.

  191. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    5 ratings12345
    Feb 29th 2008, 21:11

    MMJAZZ... Preach that to the poor girl who had a shotgun shoved in her mouth on Main st coming from class at UB by four black males who robbed her then beat her with the butt of the gun...

  192. Lucia

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 07:25

    To BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    What are you trying to say? Your comment doesn't make sense in relation to MMJAZZ statement or to this story. I agree completely with MMJAZZ's comment. HE is completely on target!!

  193. Lucia

    2 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 07:30

    Does anyone want to meet at Tim's next Sunday and help paint or donate some supplies?

  194. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 09:13

    BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME, those "robbers" were just filming some underground art cinema verite, the girl obviously wasn't reading from her script. It's incredibly safe in that area.

  195. Sal

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 10:04

    Interesting story and great comments. The Bird House people remind me of the Nickel City Co-op on Elmwood and North, certainly more grass roots.

    Manski is correct in saying that you need a claim of right to adversely possess property under New York law. Even Judge Nowak doesn't have the power to sell the property without the rightful owners' consent. Hopefully the bank will drop the lien or bring the mortgage amount to zero for these people.

  196. gaston

    4 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 10:17

    Ok most of the people commenting here have had no contact with these people. This coop is nothing like nickel city or any other respectable, nationally registered housing coop. I would not want to live withing a mile of these people. they add nothing to society don't you see? they are sponges. and they are NOT HIPPIES, they are anarchists with huge chips on their shoulders. If buffalo was smart they would boot these people out of town. and honestly i dont care where they stay as long as i dont have to deal with them, i just feel bad for those who do.

  197. mmjazz

    4 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 13:43

    Gaston,

    I think something between your view and Lucia's view might work: if the city partnered with people, collected taxes and they have a deed, why not let them improve it? I agree with you that we can't have "leeches" and send the wrong message; I was of that opinion initially. It seems that as fredrico, sal, skarnath have pointed out that in this particular neighboorhood, a special plan may be in order. I am willing to put my attachment to free enterprise aside, if this is the last means to eradicate crime in an area and take back the area block by block. There will be time where this neighborhood will become safer and more appealing to investors and landlords. At that point, you can get investors, like myself who would do the right thing. If there are shootings, drug deals going on, the only owner will be some abseentee owner, with no hope for buffalo, who wants to collect rent on a 20k property--they dont give a rats about buffalo, they just want to get a rent check from a beach in florida. If you are an investor, you are waiting for this neighborhood to turn, because it will be good for buffalo and a good investment. When the chips are down, and its about survival, it may be that we have be a little less conventional in our thinking. I sense that Sal and Skarnath have experience and I think their views have been tempered and important in this thread. Lucia, if I were in town, I might join you. It might be the kind of bold move that could take a neighborhood back. I did some habitat for humanity in an old polish neighborhood on sobieski in 93 or so. It was a cool experience for me because my parents, much before I was born lived there. Regardless of how the neighborhood changed, I still felt a kinship there. To a large extent, most people just want to know that you care and will stand side by side--there are far fewer people who are so malicious that they will want to hurt you. Fredico even said that the kinship he developed with this house has given him some security--that's what it is all about. People with courage need to reclaim neighborhoods and drive out the fear. The same way that fear came to the area, is this same way that it needs to be pushed right into Niagara River.

  198. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    3 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 16:29

    rd666. LOL. Safe as can be! It was a co-op of underground thieves stealing for the benefit of the green movement, and Moveon.org

  199. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 16:30

    rd666. LOL. Safe as can be! It was a co-op of underground thieves stealing for the benefit of the green movement, and Moveon.org

  200. IamMe

    4 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 17:22

    Its funny the advent of indoor pluming, electricity, and the auto has only been accusable to the average working person for about 80-90 years. How long has mankind been on this planet ??? Now that someone chooses not to have it. They are labeled as freaks, cult members, or bums.

  201. al-alo

    1 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 18:13

    sweet jebus, are you guys still talking about this?

  202. pegger

    2 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 19:27

    mmjazz, in answer to your question on why developers opt for the suburbs. You hit it dead on with inequities, schools, and race. There is more than a mere corelation between neighborhoods, race, poverty, etc. It is a one-to-one corespondence. Think about what is being developed in the city. Lofts and condo conversions for a unique urban population otherwise known as young single professionals. Very few children. Yes, there are parts of Buffalo that are family friendly with good schools, but dare I say it, precious few. IMHO and in practice, it was terrific to raise my kids in the burbs with great schools, room, yards, and activites in a family environment. That behind me, I now find them to be sterile bastions of mediocrity. I moved back to the city which I contend is ideal for single or childless people of all ages. To develop Buffalo in the same manner as the burbs won't fly. Here's a challenge for all. Using something like Mappoint, get an aerial view of that Amherst like street near McCarthy Park. Take a careful look at the lack of investment in that neighborhood. Very few trees, patios, bushes, sheds or pools. There is a story there!

  203. Tesla

    2 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 20:12

    Wasn't a woman recently raped in an abandoned house on near Bird+West?

    I guess that some of you would rather have that happen than have some cool people actually fixing up one of those houses.

    How is it that people always find SOMETHING to complain about, either there's too many vacant houses, or the wrong kind of people are living in them, or people that seem scary are moving in.

    Give me a break.

    And also, to the person mentioning the Manson Family, don't talk about what you know nothnig about.

    There never was a Manson Family, that term was coined by the press.

    This town's reading level is low because some of these idiots are parents.

  204. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 22:18

    Yeah Tesla, we would rather have raping and pillagin going on versus actual breaking and entering...good point!

  205. knock_knock

    2 ratings12345
    Mar 1st 2008, 22:35

    For all the so called well healed out there that call them freaks, Cult members, and freeloaders… If Freegen seems to radical. Well lets see, people that resist modern conveniences grow there own food. I’ll call them ā€œUrban Amishā€ maybe that will be more palatable to some.

  206. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 2nd 2008, 01:17

    Tesla, I'm glad that you feel that the Manson Family was a creation of the press. My dear friend Susan Atkins tells it the same way. She says: "me and Linda [ Kasabian ] were just bugging on people's houses, looking to score some dope. Then here comes the man telling us we're all part of this big scene that happened later, and how we're like, murderers or something. I think it's that pig, Patty Krenwinkle that's telling them lies about us. We barely even know Charlie. He was just hanging out with Tex, stealing cars. Some rap!...now that Lynette, she's one kooky bitch..." Bottom line: if you're sqatting in a house in Buffalo, you're just some hippie. If you're rolling down the coast in an old school bus selling groovy sand candles and getting high on acid, you just might have a little "Manson" in you.

  207. RisingDamp666

    1 ratings12345
    Mar 2nd 2008, 01:19

    Tesla, I'm glad that you feel that the Manson Family was a creation of the press. My dear friend Susan Atkins tells it the same way. She says: "me and Linda [ Kasabian ] were just bugging on people's houses, looking to score some dope. Then here comes the man telling us we're all part of this big scene that happened later, and how we're like, murderers or something. I think it's that pig, Patty Krenwinkle that's telling them lies about us. We barely even know Charlie. He was just hanging out with Tex, stealing cars. Some rap!...now that Lynette, she's one kooky bitch..." Bottom line: if you're sqatting in a house in Buffalo, you're just some hippie. If you're rolling down the coast in an old school bus selling groovy sand candles and getting high on acid, you just might have a little "Manson" in you.

  208. fredrico

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 2nd 2008, 09:12

    I think that the reason people are still commenting on this story is because deep down some of us feel very sad and angry that there has not been a better plan/solution for these houses than to demolish them.

    I have been around allot of these abandoned houses on a daily basis and I can tell -from first hand experience- that the first thing that happens to them is theives come and steal the door knobs, chandeliers, copper pipes, fireplace mantles, stained glass windows, etc (I watched this happen to the Bird House a few years before the BIRD HOUSE occupants moved in - so they did not do that). But the point is even thieves realize there is allot of value in these homes.

    Then the next thing that happens is drug dealers start breaking in and selling their drugs. Prostitutes follow them and because of a lack of anywhere to live start sleeping there. I don't want to gross you out but crack addicts have really bad bowel issues and they leave horrible evidence of that wherever they go. They also leave needles and matches around (some children found the matches a few doors down and started the front porch on fire "trying to make a camp fire" (there was some damage but luckily they were spotted and it was put out before the whole house burned down). Of course the drug dealers need protection - so then I have also had to witness the use and abuse of pit bull dogs. As I am writing this I am starting to get really depressed. IF YOU THINK I am exaggerating AT ALL please come and follow me around for a week - I could use the help. Surely if we can send a space ship to Mars - then we can come up with a better solution for what to do with these houses. I like the idea to give the houses to the disadvantaged for a dollar and help them fix it up-- in return we stop paying for section 8 - I'll bet it will still cost less than demolition.

  209. Tesla

    1 ratings12345
    Mar 2nd 2008, 14:07

    I don't give a damn if they are there.

    If they're not hurting you or anyone else, stay out of it.

    Live and let live people.

  210. BROKEEPSBLOCKINGME

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 2nd 2008, 14:46

    frederico. You have some great ideas there... I like the idea of giving the homes to qualified less fortunate people who will actually invest in the home and refurb it...eventually raising its value and contributing to the tax base... Forget section8, that has been abused and taken advantage of worse than the welfare system

  211. IamMe

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 2nd 2008, 23:09

    http://www.freegan.info/

  212. IamMe

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 2nd 2008, 23:45

    Read it, don't just look at the pictures.

  213. exnihilo

    1 ratings12345
    Mar 3rd 2008, 13:28

    reflip,

    As someone that has taken the time to read my posts, I appreciate your response. If you look at my later posts, particularly those after Tim posted, you will see that my stance on this situation changed. With more information available beyond the histrionics and hearsay posted on BRO and the radical rants (Rolling Thunder) from (it has now come to light) a former member of the Birdhouse, one can see that Tim and his crew are walking a path that is unconventional but on the up and up. Fredrico’s opinion holds more water than anyone’s in regard to the Birdhouse since he is a neighbor and can clearly quantify the impact that Tim and his cohorts have had on the neighborhood and this handsome old structure and if he is willing to go to bat for them, then who am I to question or argue?

    Now, on to the loaded portion of your response . . .

    I am one of those odd birds that takes the stance that in order to truly appreciate the United States of America, its culture, and impact on World history, all aspects of it must be viewed in an equal light unmitigated by blind patriotism or national pride. We, as a nation, are not unique in the grand scale of things; thus, the truly ugly acts of our predecessors and ā€œFounding Fathersā€ are just as important as the lofty pinnacles we have reached in our most grand actions. I am willing to take it all in one spoonful – the good, the bad, and the ugly. History has proven that, overall, we are a pretty decent lot that strive to do good despite being like adolescents who are so apt to cave to baser wants and desires regardless of the consequences.

    In regards to my above national stance and that on the Birdhouse, my original post did not state that ā€œtaking the house by forceā€ invalidated all subsequent actions, but cast a ā€œpallā€ upon those actions. In this sense my feelings at the time were based on the scant evidence available, which was (and has been proven to be) dubious at best. Without a lengthy and validated history of activity at the Birdhouse the true intentions of Tim and his crew was unclear and, through the diametrically opposed opinions expressed in the earlier BRO posts about the collective and those presented by Rolling Thunder, I made a call questioning the basic morality of their actions. This initial questioning has been relieved, as I stated earlier, as more substantial information became available; I am now willing to take it all in one spoonful – the good, the bad, and the ugly.

    Finally, if I may be so bold as to continue pontificating, the question of suburban dwellers versus urban dwellers and their intents comes up regularly here on BRO and often smacks as artificial self important backslapping as to the so called ā€œprogressivenessā€ of neo-urban life. If this movement is as powerful and influential as it is so oft huffed to be, why is there so little progress in stabilization, equalization, and resurgence? I contend that it is the simple result of the old adage that many people’s hearts just aren’t in it and lack sincerity and that the ā€œmovementā€ is more jingoistic than realistic. Blindly blaming the suburbanites for Buffalo’s ills is just too easy and only serves to squelch the reality that the plight, blight, and flight so endemic of our fair city is a symptom of larger cultural diseases – disposability and apathy. We see everything as disposable – tradition, architecture, culture, history, education, and, the most telling, people; we are apathetic towards the quagmire that exists right outside our doors and would rather complain or whine about it rather than do something active to bring about change, and that begins with the most difficult of converts – oneself.

    Now, I do not claim to be some righteous do-gooder for the city living a monastic lifestyle until I see Buffalo truly rise again and I do not mean to denigrate anyone’s opinions or efforts to bring about revitalization; however, I will state that I am one more motivated by positive efforts free of incrimination or vilification that serve only to bolster a weak position. Blame is easy to spread and solutions are difficult to come by and the City of Buffalo is but a piece in the larger puzzle of the region and nation. The suburbs and the city need to work in concert if our ills are to be solved. A more civil and honest understanding that urban, suburban, and rural are symbiotic needs to be recognized and appreciated before the preservation or desires of one trump the needs of the others and, ultimately, spell doom for all.

    Tim and the folks at the Birdhouse seem to be taking an unconventional path towards this end – sustainability and positive action – and I wish them all the luck.

  214. mmjazz

    1 ratings12345
    Mar 3rd 2008, 14:13

    exnihilo--well put. I changed my point of view as well. I will say, though, that as much as these folks might stabalize part of neighborhood against violence, there may not be other benefits. I just dont understand this freegan perspective--it may be harmless, but you would have to ask the question: what if everyone thought like this? This pure form of not working, not doing anything productive is a little bizarre. For the freegan, who built the house that your inhabiting? Who creates the electricity that you use? There are all kinds of logical holes in this supposed 'pure' form of living. It is a last ditch effort to reconcile someone who has given up being successful--the way to do that is to say that 'doing nothing' is in fact success. Even the freegan people wouldnt want everyone to live like this--they would have no one to leech from. So, is it a stablizing force in a war zone neighborhood? yes. Do we want to embrace this philosophy? not sure.

  215. exnihilo

    0 ratings12345
    Mar 3rd 2008, 14:43

    Tesla,

    At your suggestion I read the website you provided the address to. Despite agreeing with many of the points outlined there, I am once again stunned by the arrogance of people.

    Here the Freegans are outlining the reasons they are attempting to divorce themselves from the popular societal construct – the most prevalent aspect of which is their belief one should not impose themselves on the environment or each other – yet, at the very heart of the movement they are proposing imposition of their own will against those that do not hold their beliefs – specifically:

    ā€œSquatters believe that real human needs are more important than abstract notions of private property, and that those who hold deed to buildings but won’t allow people to live in them, even in places where housing is vitally needed, don’t deserve to own those buildings.ā€

    So, if I understand their position, they have appointed themselves judge and jury over the just and right use of property when it serves their cause. This is a glaring statement of hypocrisy. In addition to that golden nugget there are numerous points in the outline of their belief system that clearly illustrate that the decadent and wasteful lifestyle of American society is the only thing that makes sustainability of their movement possible and they are willing to call foul on it until its wastes prove beneficial to them. This alone aligns them with the very system they purport to be against.

    Control, control, control – why does it have to come to this?

    mmjazz - as I was typing this, you posted a response that echoes much of my above statement - I'm glad to see the dumbshit pills I am have not completely eroded my ability to create coherent thoughts that are aligned with at least another soul out in the ether . . .

  216. Zoeee

    0 ratings12345
    Jul 20th 2008, 18:57

    hell yeah.

Would you like to subscribe to this conversation?

Enter your email below, and you will receive an alert each time someone leaves a comment on this post.

What Do You Think?

Members Who Bookmarked

Text Links