November 18, 2008 by Chinatown Blogger.

The Asian American Resource Workshop is holding an event for author Michael Liu’s new book: “The Snake Dance of Asian American Activism: Community, Vision, and Power“.  This event will also serve as the annual membership meeting for the Asian American Resource Workshop. (Download PDF Snake Dance Flyer)

The mission of the Asian American Resource Workshop is to work for the empowerment of the Asian Pacific American community to achieve its full participation in the U.S. society. We are a member-based organization that seeks to document the diverse Asian Pacific American histories, experiences, and social conditions. Our resource and activities are used to respond to current Asian Pacific American issues and to promote Asian Pacific American identity.

Amazon’s description:
This text reinterprets a misunderstood epoch of the Asian American experience, the Asian American movement (AAM). The authors address the AAM’s dramatic impact on the direction of Asian American political and social activity beginning in the 1960s, particularly in terms of neighborhood redevelopment, civil rights, international solidarity, and the Jesse Jackson presidential campaigns. They argue that the movement became the vehicle to bring Asian American communities into the mainstream of civil life.

Date: Saturday, November 22, 2008
Time: 11:00 am-1:00 pm
Location: Boston Chinatown Neighborhood Center, 38 Ash St. Boston, MA

If you cannot attend, but would like a signed copy of book, please contact or RSVP by Wednesday, November 19 to (617) 426-5313 or email workshop@aarw.org

Posted in CHINATOWN CALENDAR | Print | No Comments »

November 10, 2008 by Chinatown Blogger.

A reader of the Chinatown Blog forwarded a link to a commentary written by Professor Andrew Leong from UMass Boston’s College of Public and Community Service on the proposed Foxwoods Casino for Philly Chinatown. This commentary was published by the Philadelphia Inquirer. Do readers here agree with Professor Leong’s assertion that placing a casino would unfairly burden the Chinatown community?

————————————-
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20081110_Casino_Creating_another_injustice.html

Posted on Mon, Nov. 10, 2008

COMMENTARY
Casino: Creating another injustice

The Chinatown plan is a burden, and not just because of gambling addictions.

By Andrew Leong
Chair of the Campaign to Protect Chinatown in Boston

In 1974, the Boston City Council created an “adult entertainment zone” next to the city’s Chinatown to contain the sex industry and associated vices in one controllable area. It was a glaring case of environmental racism. Chinatown residents have suffered ever since, enduring solicitation of women and children, rampant prostitution, drugs, and other petty crimes - all so the rest of Boston can exercise its “First Amendment rights.”

Will Mayor Nutter and Councilman Frank DiCicco’s proposed “commercial entertainment district” next to Philadelphia’s Chinatown create another such injustice?

City officials required an environmental impact review and took almost a year and a half considering plans for the original proposed site of a Foxwoods casino on the riverfront in South Philadelphia. But the new site, near Philadelphia’s Chinatown, is being fast-tracked, without meaningful input from the people most affected. There is an obvious disparity of process and transparency.

Why does Chinatown have to deal with more of a burden than the rest of the city or state? The casino could bring in hundreds of cars per hour, air pollution and congestion, petty and organized crime, and increased gambling addiction in the Asian community. While catering to the concerns of other neighborhoods and Foxwoods, city officials are not doing their part to represent Chinatown.

This type of economic development is built on the backs of a community of color that has been neglected at best and exploited at worst.

Casinos know Asians are a key clientele, and it is common to find them aiming predatory marketing schemes at Asian communities. Casino advertisements abound in Asian-language newspapers. Every day, casino buses line up in virtually every Chinatown across the country - Boston, San Francisco, New York, Seattle - waiting to cart off busloads of Asians, many of them elderly, to gamble away their earnings.

While Asians might face cultural or linguistic barriers in other industries, casinos employ a number of tactics to eliminate those barriers. They include Asian staff, Asian gambling games such as mahjong and pai gow, Asian entertainment stars to entice homesick immigrants, and ethnic nights. Foxwoods’ Web site even maintains a Chinese version.

Relocating Foxwoods next to Chinatown is a marketer’s dream. No buses are needed; Asians can just walk in.

A 2003 study by the University of Connecticut Health Center (near Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun in that state) found that 59 percent of Southeast Asians who had sought social-service assistance were classified as “pathological gamblers.”

Such gamblers make up 1 percent to 3 percent of the American population, but among Asian Americans, the figure is 6.5 percent to 15 percent. In a health survey in San Francisco’s Chinatown, 70 percent of respondents indicated that “problem gambling” was their top social concern.

Timothy Fong, co-director of UCLA’s Gambling Studies Program, called gambling a “real hidden addiction” for Asians, because cultural norms dictate silence. A vicious cycle develops, wherein policymakers do not see the problem and therefore offer no services to address it.

Yet, politicians do support this effort to reap general revenue for all at Chinatown’s expense.

In my studies of Chinatowns, a common threat is the failure to understand them as more than just places to eat Asian food. Chinatown is a vibrant, historical community, full of residents who work and live in Philadelphia - and one worthy of protection.

Chinatown survived the ravages of the highway during the urban-renewal era, and it conquered a proposal to build a stadium there in 2000. It has thrived even under harsh conditions. Imagine how well it would do if officials gave it a fair chance.

Andrew Leong is an associate professor at the College of Public and Community Service at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. His e-mail address is andrew.leong@umb.edu.

Posted in WORD ON THE STREET | Print | No Comments »

November 7, 2008 by Chinatown Blogger.

The Boston Metro published an article on Nov 5, 2008 that, “…some voters in Chinatown were perplexed by a sample ballot that was being passed out apparently by an advocacy group to those waiting in line at The Metropolitan building on Oak Street.”

Then, a visitor to the Chinatown Blog, posted this comment : “As a Chinatown resident, I was very displeased to find that the ’sample ballot’ handed out while I waited in line to vote yesterday was actually ILLEGAL propaganda being distributed to voters. The ’sample ballots’ were already filled-in, and I saw voters using the samples as references for their votes! They were being handed out by an ‘advocacy’ group. I plan to do whatever it takes to bring attention to the illegal actions of the group.”

The Chinatown Blogger sent an email to the commenter if he had a copy of the sample ballot, whether if he knew which “advocacy group” they were from, and that he should forward any formal complaints to the City of Boston’s Elections Department. So far, this commenter has not replied.

Without some form of evidence and with such a short paragraph by the Metro newspaper as is their standard,  accusations of “illegal actions” may be too premature and even unwarranted unless there is clear evidence. To find out more on what actually happened, the Chinatown Blogger sent out inquiries by email and made some phone calls to investigate. The word is that Sample Ballots were distributed by the City of Boston legally to assist in voter education and registration, particularly to help communities with large limited-English speaking voters. The ballots are marked clearly as SAMPLE BALLOT and cannot be used as an actual ballot in the voting booths.

In regards to passing of literature outside of the voting booths, the law stipulates that campaign workers/volunteers can pass out literature to voters as long as the workers are 150 feet away from the voting booths. However, due to the density of Boston streets, sometimes 150 feet is not possible and at the Metropolitan voting place at 38 Oak Street, the poll workers/volunteers were instructed to stay outside of the courtyard beyond the metal gates.

From my inquiries, the director of the Chinese Progressive Association, a community organization based in Chinatown, wrote a response:

“Lydia Lowe, Director, Chinese Progressive Association
Reports on Tuesday’s election in the Chinatown Blog, Boston Globe and the Metro referred to potentially illegal electioneering by “an advocacy group.” One report charged that two volunteers of this organization were telling people whom to vote for in Chinese close to the polls, and another report claimed that the advocacy group was distributing sample ballots with bubbles filled in for all races but the presidency.

Since the Chinese Progressive Association (CPA) was the main non-profit advocacy group distributing literature outside at the polls yesterday, I want to clarify that none of our staff or representatives took part in any such electioneering. CPA conducted strictly non-partisan activity focused on distributing flyers opposed to Question One, provided a poster-sized version of a blank sample ballot that was fully translated into Chinese (including Chinese transliterations of candidate names), set up chairs all along the waiting line to accommodate elderly voters, and provided transportation to the polls from several elderly housing developments. CPA took no position on any of the candidates, and CPA representatives would never tell voters whom to select. We always distribute blank sample ballots, which are fully bilingual, in advance of the election, in order to allow Chinese-speaking voters to prepare and mark their own selections so that they have their own “key” to use when they enter the voting booth.

From what I observed, other campaign volunteers encouraged support for one candidate or another, and there was indeed a campaign piece in circulation that used a replica of the sample ballot and marked a slate of choices, but I believe all of this campaigning occurred legally, outside of the Metropolitan courtyard, an area determined by the warden to be a sufficient distance from the poll entrance.”

Posted in WORD ON THE STREET | Print | No Comments »

November 3, 2008 by Chinatown Blogger.

 
Current photo of Hudson Street. Beyond the wall is the Albany Street/Surface Road ramp to I-93 and I-90.

The information in this post was graciously given to this site by Mitrophan Chin, a Chinese parishioner researching on the history of churches. This was the email (edited) sent by Mitrophan:

“I found out that there used to be Orthodox churches  on Hudson St… and they have since been relocated elsewhere after the Chinese immigrants took over the Syrian immigrant communities on that street. For the interest of your readers, here are their current location and websites, if you’re interested in creating some historical page on what is today is known as the Chinatown Gateway before any highway construction was done in the area… I myself am a Chinese parishioner of St Mary’s in Cambridge, MA and i frequently come to Chinatown for dimsum and visits of in-laws. -Mitrophan Chin”

The Chinatown/South Cove neighborhood was at one time an area of tidal flats. Different immigrant groups had settled in the area including the Irish, Jews, and Syrians. The center for the Irish community was the St. James Church on Albany Street and which later moved to Harrison Avenue. In the 1950s, the east side of Hudson Street was demolished to make way for highways.

Here are excerpts taken from the text of each church’s website.  Many thanks Mitrophan for sending the links:

1) St. George Syrian Orthodox, 32 Hudson, now at 55 Emmonsdale Road, West Roxbury

Photo taken from www.stgeorgeofboston.org

Founded in 1900, Father George Maloof of Deir el Ghazelle arrived in Boston and established the Chapel of St. George in his home at 6 Oxford Street. As the Orthodox population increased, the community moved to a larger facility at 38 Edinboro Street and then to 32 Hudson Street.

2) St. John of Damascus, Syrian Orthodox, 68 Hudson now at 300 West St., Dedham

Photo taken from www.stjohnd.org

The History of the Church of St. John of Damascus, in the United States dates back to the early 1900s. Our forbears, who emigrated to the United States from the Middle East, particularly from Damascus, Syria and Beirut, Lebanon brought with them the faith of their heritage. The migration, which was motivated in the aftermath of the Turkish persecutions, brought these freedom loving people to the shores of America. The majority of those who landed in Massachusetts settled in the South End of Boston, and were of the Eastern Orthodox faith.

These pilgrims had many trials and tribulations which they had to overcome, one of which was the language barrier. Still, the dire need for a Church facility was a primary focus of this community, and in 1914, the Society of St. John of Damascus purchased its first piece of real estate, a house on 68 Hudson Street in Boston. The facility on Hudson Street housed the Pastor, Father Solomon Faineny and his family on the first floor, and the basement was fashioned into a church for worship.

3) St. Mary’s Cathedral of the Syrian Orthodox Antiochian Church  Hudson near Oak St. now at 8 Inman St, Cambridge

The Church of St. Mary’s came into existence in 1928. It was founded by a group of families who had been parishioners of the Church of St. John of Damascus. This energetic group of families banded together to further the growth of the Orthodox Faith. These faithful and courageous individuals formed and organized the Antiochian Society of St. Mary’s Church, constituted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

The first assemblage of the founders was held at the Greek Orthodox Church on Union Park Street, Boston. It was learned that the City of Boston had recently closed a school building at 119 Hudson Street, Boston, and that the city was seeking a buyer. Arrangements were made shortly thereafter to purchase the building, and to renovate the structure to serve as a Church.

Posted in WORD ON THE STREET | Print | No Comments »

November 3, 2008 by Chinatown Blogger.

Ever since Governor Deval Patrick proposed to legalize casino gambling in Massachusetts, the Chinatown Blogger has always wondered “what if” Foxwoods were allowed to build a casino at the 20-acre Chinatown Gateway/South Bay Special Study area ? City officials have often indicated they would like to see the area as an iconic gateway into Boston, similar to the effect of the Zakim Bridge in the north. Foxwoods in Boston Chinatown is not happening anytime soon because as you may recall, House Speaker Sal DiMasi who also happens to represent Chinatown, adamantly opposed the casino bill. Eventually, Governor Patrick relented on the casino bill.

However, a Foxwoods casino may become a reality in Philadelphia Chinatown. A former Boston Chinatown resident, Lawrence Joe, sent this  YouTube link and article about a proposed casino in Philly Chinatown. If Massachusetts ever approves casino gambling, Boston Chinatown may one day face the same questions.

——————————————————————————-
Chinatown largely cool to Gallery casino site
By Jennifer Lin
Inquirer Staff Writer
Philly Enquirer

Foxwoods Casino faced three hurdles when it wanted to build on the waterfront: the community, the mayor, and the potential for traffic congestion.

Today, with the Gallery as its new targeted site, the mayor is satisfied, traffic concerns are muted, but the community - in this case, Chinatown - remains an obstacle.

“The message the city is sending out is, ‘Chinatown, be a good soldier and take it on the chin for the city,’ ” said Debbie Wei, principal of an elementary school in Chinatown, the Folk Arts-Cultural Treasures Charter School. “It almost feels everyone else doesn’t want it, so put it in Chinatown.”

Stunned by the news yesterday, Chinatown groups snapped into action, with an anti-casino petition ready for circulation and town meetings planned in the days ahead.

Whether that opposition is powerful enough to stall the project will become clearer in a few weeks as the matter goes before the zoning board and City Council.

Wei and others acknowledged that they faced difficult odds given the political will behind the Gallery site, which Gov. Rendell and Mayor Nutter support.

They recall 2000, when Chinatown was able to block Mayor John F. Street’s plan to build a baseball stadium at 11th and Vine Streets. But this time around, “our fight’s going to be worse,” Wei said.

Nutter anticipated the community’s reaction.

“Our obligation,” he said yesterday, “is to sit down and listen, to hear people’s reasonable concerns, and to see how to address them.”

That might not be easy given the response from the neighborhood of about 5,000 residents that already sits cheek-by-jowl with the Gallery.

“You got to be kidding,” said Cecilia Moy Yep, a lifelong Chinatown resident, when Councilman Frank DiCicco briefed her on Foxwoods’ plan at a meeting for community leaders yesterday morning.

In promoting a casino at the Gallery, Rendell told the Inquirer Editorial Board yesterday that one of the advantages of the site was “it is not basically a residential area.”

Some took that as an insult.

“He doesn’t understand us,” said Yep, director emerita of the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corp.

Over the decades, Chinatown has gone to battle against urban-renewal projects pushed by the city, state or federal government. Residents see big projects like the Convention Center, the Gallery, and the Federal Detention Center as boxing them in and limiting their community’s ability to grow.

“Other administrations have made a mistake in not seeing Chinatown and not dealing with the people of the community,” said Helen Gym, a board member of Asian Americans United, who sends two of her children to a charter school in Chinatown. “That’s exactly the approach that we’re going to fight tooth and nail.”

Many residents said they feared not only the increase in casino traffic, but also the possibility of more crime. Several said they endorsed the idea of a 1,500-foot buffer zone between any casino and schools, churches and playgrounds. That concept grew out of the community backlash against the original riverfront projects: Foxwoods in South Philadelphia and SugarHouse in Fishtown/Northern Liberties.

“We definitely see that as important, too,” said Harry Leong, director of a community center for the Chinese Christian Church, about four blocks from the Gallery.

“I work with a lot of youth,” Leong said. “Businesses like casinos and bars, these undermine what we’re trying to do in terms of building community and building youth.”

At the Gallery site, there are at least two churches within 1,500 feet of the mall - St. John the Evangelist Roman Catholic Church near 13th and Market Streets, and the Chinese Christian Church at 10th and Spring Streets.

“People view Chinatown as primarily restaurants. But we have a community here, too,” Leong said.

Among morning commuters at the Gallery yesterday, some were concerned most about the impact on traffic.

Joy Widgeon, 30, who commutes from Erial to her administrative secretarial job in Center City, said the area was too congested already.

“It’s going to be worse, and then it might bring an element that might not be here,” she said.

Keke Wang, a Chinatown business owner who was a member of Street’s gaming task force, said he could see both sides of the debate.

“If you do not take care of the environment and the community near the location, it can be a disaster,” Wang said.

“Usually when a casino is built, they pay more attention to their own business than the . . . nearby area of a casino,” Wang said. “No one wants buses with dust and noise.”

But it could also “strengthen the image of Philadelphia and give visitors one more place to go,” Wang said.

Indeed, the larger business community sees a casino at the Gallery as an opportunity.

And at least one potential problem - managing traffic - could be a far different issue with this new proposal, and arguably easier to address.

The Gallery already is a hub for Regional Rail, subway and trolley lines, while bus routes for SEPTA and NJ Transit pass by on Market Street.

Casino customers could be encouraged to leave their cars behind if they could get to the site via train or bus, said Paul Levy, president of the Center City District, a special-services area supported by private business.

“There is a scenario where we wouldn’t need all the casino buses,” Levy said. “SEPTA could draw people in.”

With the two proposed riverfront locations, much of the community backlash was against the potential increase in traffic. “But you stick a casino in a place where people already are and you have a whole different customer mix,” Levy said.

Levy said a downtown location would “dramatically reduce the need” for car travel and could attract more overnight guests already in Center City for conventions.

Posted in WORD ON THE STREET | Print | 5 Comments »