Out-of-the-Neighborhood Activist
Mount Pleasant activist Laurie Collins has never had a problem taking on the merchants in her neighborhood. As head of the Mount Pleasant Neighborhood Alliance, she spearheaded a successful effort to ban the sale of single servings of booze in the area and was willing to take on anyone who opposed the idea down at the Alcohol Beverage Control Board.
Her activism was understandable, given that the home she’s lived in for more than two decades on 17th Street NW is within earshot of the main drag.
So when a new neighborhood group was organized with the aim of lifting a ban on live music in Mount Pleasant, Collins wasn’t about to stay out of the fight. Live music is banned under another Collins initiative—voluntary agreements signed by bars and restaurants several years ago. She plans to protect those agreements.
No one was really surprised by the biting Collins money quote in reference to the live music proponents that appeared in a recent story by Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher. “I will be damned if people outside my neighborhood come in and do something that affects my property value,” she told the Post.
There’s only one little problem: Collins doesn’t live in the Mount Pleasant right now.
She’s a renter in a Cleveland Park apartment complex just down Porter Street NW. For the past few months she’s lived up the hill from her old neighborhood. “I am separated from my husband, which causes me to be temporarily away from Mount Pleasant,” she says.
Collins has delivered the “temporary” change of address report to the Mount Pleasant Neighborhood Alliance board. “They have absolutely no problem with it,” says Collins.
Her desire for full disclosure apparently did not extend to Fisher, who had previously interviewed Collins in her Mount Pleasant abode.
“I am not a hypocrite,” says Collins. “I’m not an outsider, so I can’t be a hypocrite….My body may not be there, but my head and my heart are there in Mount Pleasant,” she says.
36 Responses to “Out-of-the-Neighborhood Activist”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- YouthAIDS Gala: the Weird World of Ashley Judd (0
)
… - Our Morning Roundup (0)
And Now, Anacostia discovers a new deli may be opening soon off MLK Ave. This is huge news. Frozen T… - Last Week’s Most Popular Blog Posts (1)
1. City Paper Owner Files for Bankruptcy by Erik Wemple 2. Did McCain Campaign Register www.votefor… - Marion Barry: Indestructible (0)
DC Wire is reporting that Councilmember Marion Barry received a few stitches after falling down in A… - Don’t Start Up The Bandwagon….Yet (3)
To all Redskins fans about to call in: "Can we ban the SB word?" -- Brian Mitchell on 980 at 3:22 p.…
- YouthAIDS Gala: the Weird World of Ashley Judd (0
April 16th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
So now it is common knowledge that we have known for quite a while. Laurie’s quotes just show how far she will go to have her will imposed on the neighborhood.
Here is alot of good that the MPNA has done for Mount Pleasant over the years, but just because a dictator does some good doesn’t mean that the dictatorship is appropriate.
Please visit our website
http://www.hearmountpleasant.org
We want to hear your opinons on the issue.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Here is alot of good that the MPNA has done for Mount Pleasant over the years, but just because a dictator does some good doesn’t mean that the dictatorship is appropriate.
Correction:
There is alot of good that the MPNA has done for Mount Pleasant over the years, but just because a dictator does some good doesn’t mean that the dictatorship is appropriate.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Why is this a big deal? The fact that Laurie Collins is renting outside the neighborhood in which she lived for 20 years — and where presumably her husband still actually resides — due to a major life situation seems absolutely irrelevant to whether or not she can legitimately participate in local politics. If she’s still active in the neighborhood goings-ons, then so what?
It seems as if you are trying to find a technicality on which to attack her. That’s a pretty low blow, especially considering the circumstances. Stick to the issues.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Laurie Collins has chosen to make it a big issue:
DC North Article:
http://www.capitalcommunitynews.com/publications/dcnorth/2007_March/html/Ward1.cfm
Laurie Collins, a 20-year Mount Pleasant resident and president of the MPNA, is skeptical about Hear Mount Pleasant’s commitment to the neighborhood, suggesting their membership is comprised of people who will likely move within a few years. “You have to consider who are Mount Pleasant residents,”
Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/11/AR2007041102268.html
And I will be damned if people outside my neighborhood come in and do something that affects my property value by worsening the parking situation.” (Because some in the pro-music group are renters — Treibitz, for example, lives in a group home next door to Collins — Collins considers them “outsiders.”)
Laurie Collins says the bid to undo music bans she brokered will fail. “I will be damned if people outside my neighborhood come in and do something that affects my property value,” she said.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Collins told Marc Fisher that people who live in Mount Pleasant but rent their homes are “outsiders,” and thus don’t deserve a say in what happens in the neighborhood.
I live in Mount Pleasant. I rent. By her logic, I don’t deserve an opinion. I’m an “outsider.”
That’s offensive on its face. Moreover, how can she question anyone’s status as a “legitimate” member of this community when she doesn’t reside there?
Like many Mount Pleasant residents, I can’t afford to buy a home in the neighborhood but I want to stay.
If I had the money to buy, I’d happily take Collins’s home off her hands. Then she could concentrate on strong-arming businesses and insulting her neighbors in Cleveland Park.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
You are so petty. Have you ever gotten separated before? Have you ever had to find an apartment on short notice with enough space for your child too? It is extremely likely that she simply could not find something in the hood under the circumstances, and I expect when her situation is settled she will choose to again live in Mt. Pleasant. And if not, then I doubt you’ll see her caring about what happens in MtP at that point.
I don’t even agree with her strong stand on the music issue. But you will not see me saying “you have no right to debate because you technically are 3/4 of a mile away, even though you lived in MtP for 20 years, and plan to return as soon as humanly possible, and still own a house there, and are still actively involved in local organizations and events.” Can the same be said of the Hear Mount Pleasant people on average? I’m sorry - but even with everything you’re quoting her here, (including that misquote about the outsiders - she was actually referring to the people who would come to see music in Mt. Pleasant, causing an adams morgan-style parking situation, not the residents) she still has a lot more credibility than you do.
Why can’t you just debate this for the issue itself and leave this crap out of it? There’s a perfectly reasonable debate to be had without getting ugly. It doesn’t help your cause at all to jump up and down and say “but she doesn’t really live here any more!!” Nobody cares.
I think the Hear Mount Pleasant web site makes some pretty reasonable propositions, and this issue ought to be discussed openly. There is just no reason to make this kind of underhanded attack and it cheapens your cause.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Now, now. There’s nothing wrong with having an out-of-body, er, out-of-mind experience. This town is full of people who live elsewhere who tell us what to do. They’re called Members of Congress and the President. On the bright side, at least Laurie Collins doesn’t arrive in Mt. Peasant from Upper Northwest (Upper Caucasia) with a full motorcade and armed guards. She’s in Mt. Peasant in spirit.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
“Collins told Marc Fisher that people who live in Mount Pleasant but rent their homes are “outsiders,” and thus don’t deserve a say in what happens in the neighborhood.”
NO. This has to stop. Fisher misrepresented her quote. She was NOT talking about the pro-music/renter/residents, but rather the parking problem that might be created by people coming IN to Mt. Pleasant to see music. Like Adams Morgan. Why would she think that live music would have any bearing on parking from people who already live there? It makes no sense.
When I first read that article I thought it looked fishy. So I asked Laurie if that was really what she meant and she said of course not. I guess Marc couldn’t be bothered to make sure he understood her, but then, it makes for a nice centerpiece to his anti-Laurie Collins story, doesn’t it?
Laurie may not be in the popular opinion on this issue but I can’t believe that everyone is so quick to take that trash piece at face value.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
I can’t say who’s right but I wrote Fisher to ask him if she really told him renters don’t deserve a say. He stood by what he wrote.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
I’ve known Laurie Collins for the past year and I think she’s a great woman. I agree with Jamie completely that her current living situation has nothing to do with this debate and quite frankly am sickened by the commenters above who are using it to enhance their argument. I’m sure you thought it was helping your cause, but it’s in fact doing the opposite. Your credibility has been damaged by taking such a low blow.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Hmmmmmmmmm…..I do not know who is right either, but I think it may matter when a person choses to move to another area.
Maybe Ms. Collins thougth it did not matter where she rented if she does not consider renters as real residents. Maybe she did not intend the words to come out that way, who knows? I can see both sides however and it does seem that Ms. Collins has a heart for Mt. Pleasant and her home there. Nevertheless, others who live or have businesses there do not necessarily hold her same views on the impact of music, and every community must consist of some compromise.
April 16th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Lori has a twenty year record in MP and continues to own property there. That personal family reasons dictate she take temporary residence elsewhere is a small thing when compared with her amply demonstrated leadership and service in that neighborhood. It’s an interesting gotcha news point, but beside the bigger point.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Jeffrey, first off, I was misquoted in the Wash Post article. I’ve had years of experience with the press and they still can’t get it right. I told Fisher that many members of the MPNA are renters. I am a renter too. For the record: I have no problems with renters.
Second, as far as being an outsider–sorry, I’m no outsider–my point of outsiders was directed to people outside the neighborhood coming into an already congested neighborhood for night life. As far as my home in Mt. Pleasant is concerned, I couldn’t afford to buy it either.
Finally, I have tremendous support from my Mt. Pleasant neighbors and businesses, the MPNA Board of Directors, friends, family and other political groups.
My personal life is no one’s business and I will continue to protect my privacy and the privacy of my family.
April 16th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Voluntary agreements have the force of law, enforced by ABRA, violations leading to fines and/or termination of licenses. If Laurie is no longer a Mount Pleasant resident, then she shouldn’t be writing laws for Mount Pleasant.
Laurie lays claim to “privacy”, but we all sacrifice a bit of that when we get involved in public issues. I’m sorry about her family problems, but if they have in fact taken her out of the neighborhood, the residents affected by her public policy activities ought to be given some explanation of the situation. Is she a resident, or is she not? Is she returning, or is she not? It makes a difference in her role of ex officio “mayor” of Mount Pleasant.
April 16th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
I totally disagree with Laurie on the music issue. For one thing, we can’t get an straight answer as to if it’s a parking problem, a noise problem or a drunk and disorderly crowd problem.
However, citing her current situation is cheap and uncalled for. She is most certainly still a MtP resident. [Even if a misguided one at that ;-)]
April 16th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Jack:
It seems Laurie has answered the two germain questions raised by this reporting. What public good would be furthered by her laying bare her present marital situation to you? Your request appears premature, and so unseemly.
April 16th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
What effect does a president of an organization’s departure from a neighborhood have to do with the validity of existing agreements? It’s like saying that because Bill Clinton no longer lives in the White House every law passed during his tenure can be automatically invalidated on the grounds that he no longer lives in DC.
April 17th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
By “explanation of the situation”, I mean simply that she should be open about her current residency. Is she living in Mount Pleasant, or not? And if she’s not, then she should cease attempting to govern matters in Mount Pleasant. That would be akin to my telling, say, Cleveland Park or Columbia Heights residents what rules they should impose on their neighborhood businesses. One can offer opinions and advice, certainly, but in the end, the people who live in the neighborhood should be the ones setting the rules for the neighborhood.
April 17th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
It is my personal belief that even though she lives outside of the neighborhood that Laurie does have a vested interest in the neighborhood, and we would love to work with her. We want input from all the people that consider Mount Pleasant home in some way or another.
If the MPNA had given us such a voice in their organization and asked for community input on the topic, we would not be having this issue now.
Hear Mount Pleasant also has members and supporters who’s hearts are in Mount Pleasant but for reasons personal or economic do not live within Mount Pleasant’s boundaries. We think all voices matter on this issue, including Laurie’s.
We just don’t want the voices of others in the neighborhood to be muted because they haven’t lived there for 20+ years.
(These opinions are my own, and not necessarily those of Hear Mount Pleasant as an organization)
April 20th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
The president of the the Mount Pleasant Business Association doesn’t own a business in Mt. Pleasant anymore and hasn’t for years (unless you count being a landlord); Historical Mt. Pleasant kept a non resident on its board for 2 years after she moved; the ANC routinely represents non resident interests and non resident business owners. Mt. Pleasant street is full of apartment dwellers of a much higher density that Adams Morgan (which has skirted the Reed Cooke Zoning overlay with all the nightclubs), Yet their elected representative opts to represent millionair businessmen before DC agencies
I think Laurie meets the legal definition of residency in Mt. Pleasant-she owns a home there, has a business there and uses that as her legal address.
Finally while Laurie has been forceful on the voumtary agreements, I believe they were executed when Joan Gordon was MPNA president.
Lin
April 23rd, 2007 at 1:25 am
Laurie, saying you were misquoted is what every politician says when they say something unpopular.
I have little doubt that the Czar of Mount Pleasant meant what she said–she hates outsiders, renters, whoever isn’t with her on the music issue. Tell me this: What kind of city bans live music from one of its neighborhoods?
Hipster coffee shops with shitty service: no problem.
Overpriced pizza joint: no problem.
Yuppie bars: no problem.
Live music, local people actually playing tunes: a problem. WTF?
Laurie’s stance and her protestations of being a long-time resident are only made more ironic considering that she’s either ignoring or doesn’t know Mount Pleasant’s enormous impact on the local music scene. A ton of great albums, singles, whatever were actually recorded in that very neighborhood.
But in typical DC fashion, its politicians want to pave over our cultural history. So we bulldoze Marvin Gaye’s house. We push go-go bands further into the ‘burbs. And we sell off U Street to the corporate chains. Why is one of the best jazz clubs in MOCO?
And why can’t we hear a great live band over a tall cold one? Outsiders coming in and parking their cars? Is that really all it takes? Is that really the reason? Laurie should be ashamed. She needs to stay in Cleveland Park.
April 28th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
I’m sure this thread has lost it’s last breath…..but here goes…..
How can I hate renters Cherkis? I’m a RENTER. I was misquoted, just like you are misinformed.
As far as banning live music, I did no such thing. None of the establishments wanted live entertainment in the first place and none of them had it on their applications. So when it was negotiated not to have it, it wasn’t an issue to them.
Second, there are 8 establishments in Mt. Pleasant that are CR’s. Five of them either don’t want live music or have already signed agreements for live music with MPNA in the last 3-4 months. So, I would say the majority is just fine.
WTF you say about cultural history? Did you know that Mt. Pleasant used to be a DRY neighborhood? No alcohol at all. If you are so pissed about not having any musical cultural history in Mt. Pleasant, maybe we should try and bring the dry cultural history back as well. What do you say?
There are quite a number of neighborhoods who don’t have live music. Mt. Pleasant is not unique. Do your homework. I am not ashamed of anything and I will continue to do what I do for the MPNA and Mount Pleasant.
Peace Out
April 28th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
Again, Laurie please explain why parking trumps culture. You waited more than week to respond and the best you can do is mention that one point in Mt. Pleasant’s history it was a DRY neighborhood. Wow. Next you’ll tell my dear CP readers that at some point in MP’s history people didn’t drive cars–they rode horses. And that back in the day, people didn’t communicate via e-mails and listservs. They could only communicate through letters and telephone calls.
Laurie, please stay in Cleveland Park.
April 29th, 2007 at 11:28 am
I waited more than a week to respond because I just noticed this yesterday. This isn’t a top priority for me or our neighborhood and to be quite frank, not too many people care about having live entertainment. We have far bigger, more important issues to deal with.
Of course with me posting back and baited by you, I suppose I keep it alive as well. As far as cultural history, you brought it up–you mentioned music in venues, I mentioned alcohol in music venues–
Sorry to disappoint you Cherkis, I may be back in Mt. Pleasant sooner than you think.
Peace, Out
April 29th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Oh Laurie! You bait me once again.
So you think “not too many people care about having live entertainment.” I’d like to see the polling data that backs this up. Obviously people do care and care enough to form a group to bring live music to Mt. Pleasant.
Please. Laurie you continue to avoid the real reason you don’t want live music–parking. I’m sorry but it is already impossible to park in Mt. Pleasant after 8 p.m. So how would having live music make the parking situation in your neighborhood worse? It’s already bad.
Please tell me what it is about hearing a rock band and drinking a beer that makes you so fearful?
April 29th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Actually Cherkis, I have a 2-car garage so parking isn’t a problem for me.
As for the group, hey, I am all for it–we have people who care about knitting, gardening, children, yoga and pilates and care enough to form groups to bring that as well to our neighborhood.
ME fearful of hearing a rock band and drinking a beer? Jherkis, you don’t know me at all do you. You mean you’ve never seen me at a Grateful Dead concert…with a Sam Adams in hand rocking out?
Tsk tsk….you must not get out much.
Tag you’re it!
April 29th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
How would I know you? I don’t knit. I don’t obsess over parking issues.
And I would never think that bragging about “rocking out” at a Dead show with a Sam Adams was cool. I think your use of the words “rocking out,” “Grateful Dead concert” and “Sam Adams” should disqualify you from having any say with what goes on in a Mt. Pleasant bar.
What’s next Laurie? You’re gonna tell me you caught the Doobie Brothers while smoking a Virginia Slim?
April 30th, 2007 at 7:04 am
This will be my last posting:
Jerkis: Thank you for finally admitting you don’t know me. You don’t know me at all.
Peace, Out
April 30th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Name calling is so becoming. Have fun at Wolf Trap this summer. I hear there’s plenty of parking.
May 10th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
I would like to redirect the debate away from personal comments and focus on the issues. The music issue is a serious one and deserves debate.
Ms. Collins residency is an amorphous side issue, both personal and public, given that she chose to take a public leadership role on this issue and maintain her role beyond her actual residency in the neighborhood. Her 20 years aside, it seems that she is not currently residing there. The past is the past, and this is about the rights of the current residents of Mt. Pleasant. Residency and domicile are partly legal issues though, which I am not qualified to comment on. She does still live in DC, regardless. If she had moved to VA or MD, it might have been a bigger deal.
One thought I had is that Ms. Collins formerly had a residential interest in her property, and her tone in the Post article was that she was protecting her rights as a resident to be free from noise and parking violations. Is there an implication that she is instead protecting an investment interest in an asset in a civil proceeding? I don’t think so. They have a name for this when you do it in the stock market, but it seems that most of the action likely occured prior to the residency switch up. But all that aside, this does raise an interesting question: At what point does Ms. Collins’ interest outweigh the following five interests?
1). The commercial interest of another real property owner to offer live entertainment to compete with other neighborhoods and states (VA)–i.e. is this unnecessary restraint on free trade (for both touring musicians and local musicians) given the existing regulations covering noise violations and parking violations. From personal experience I can guarantee you that the city has no problems ticketing, towing, and booting cars in that or any other neighborhood.;
2). The 1st amendment expression rights of the artists–by MPNA promoting their own outdoor concerts while denying almost all non-religious music, they are in effect a quasi governmental organization that allows some music and disallows other music. They seek to control art in order to curb (pun intended) parking and noise violations. They might argue that they are only seekign to control a few bars, but noise restrictions in most residential neighborhoods effectively make it so that no drummer can ever play in a house unless they spend ten grand to soundproof the place. Only commercial establishments are left for group performances, and like it or not, bars are where music happens. Time, place, and manner restrictions are all well and good, but this is a systematic effort to control all non-religious musical expression in this area of the city.;
3). The commercial interests of musicians who wish to practice their trade in the area. Though from experience I can say that there are few musicians who can make their livelihood from music outside of playing at weddings, so this is likely a non-issue.
4). The rights of the residents who want to hear music performed locally. This causes people to have to spend money to travel to other neighborhoods to hear music. It doesn’t sound like much, but if 300 Mt. Pleasant residents have to pay cab or metro fare every weekend to go a mile or two to hear music, then that adds up to a lot of money that is being spent by residents to support a few property owners (perhaps absentee property owers) who are fearful of parking violators.
5). And finally, the property interests of the other owners who feel that having a healthy arts scene will actually increase property values of their homes ala Clarendon (VA), 18th street, U street, 14th street, Mount Vernon Square, etc. One could compare this neighborhood to others and find that residential property values are in fact being depressed. Or one could argue that some residents would rather see property values hold steady, given that the main effect of a increase in property value for a long term resident is higher property taxes. (Though I am a renter, so perhaps a home owner will happily disabuse me of my notion.)
Finally, what increased value has Ms. Collins been able to garner for her property at the expense of the other taxpayers in her area who might like to see or play music? Does she have a right in perpetuity to this government enforced benefit, as she claims, or is there a limit on how long one can contract away other’s rights to expression?
May 17th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
It is depressing how low this discussion “progresses”.
Outweigh? How ridiculous. These agreements represent compromises. These were negotiated agreements. They contained provisions all could live with. If the businesses did not like it, then they should not have signed.
Now, it is not only Lauries right. it is the rights of neighbors that live in close proximity of the strip and whose lifes and property values will be affected. These is no rare, extremist MTP practice: just see how many establishments in the city have the same agreements. You know why? THE LAW gives neighbors the THE RIGHT to protest a license. You do not like it? Move to the jungle. In this land, people –businesses and neighbors–compromise, agree, and sign enforceable contracts.
Booooring…
I want to direct you all to http://www.mtpleasantdc.org. In the “forum”, under “hot topics”, under “music”, there are some real arguments. Not this low back and forth. PRN, linda and monicaru have inteligent and well written postings. No one from the music side has even remotely come close to address the topics they raise. Brains are urgently needed.
May 17th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Ah! By the way. The establishment you talk about ARE RESTAURANTS, with restaurant licenses. NOT bars.
May 18th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
I invite you to visit the Hear Mount Pleasant website if you are really interesting in this topic.
“These were negotiated agreements that everyone could live with”
From our Radio show the owner of Haydees spoke of the 2 year legal struggle she went through before she felt that she had to sign to save her business. If you missed the show we are in the progress of getting the transcripts up on the website - as well as written testimonies that document the “negotiations” that took place over VAs.
“They didn’t want live music”
OR
“As far as banning live music, I did no such thing. None of the establishments wanted live entertainment in the first place and none of them had it on their applications. So when it was negotiated not to have it, it wasn’t an issue to them.”
To this I must ask, then why ban music. By negotiating it in their VA so that they legally are not allowed to have live music that is the same as banning it. I am missing the differences.
(These opinions are my own and not necessarily those of Hear Mount Pleasant)
May 19th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
Glad to see this debate is still going. It’s an important one!
October 30th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Laurie is a white supremacist. She should move to a aryan nation compound in west virginia.
October 30th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
I find it particularly hilarious and ironic that Laurie Collins used the Dischord name for Cherkis, and indeed the entire newspaper, “Jerkis.” Previous to this I only heard the top echelon of DC musicians and club staff use that term. It really cracks me up that this pejorative crossed from hipster slang to regular usage. The City Paper definitely needs to make shirts.