Comments
sleevieb t1_j1fdqys wrote
Lot of great stuff in there.
John Baliles has a substack?!
https://rva5x5.substack.com/
lunar_unit t1_j1fqhg6 wrote
He breaks down the unbelievable lack of city action regarding the Enrichmond stuff, really well here (and illustrates just how dysfunctional our city government is on this):
Asterion7 t1_j1fy1uq wrote
It's crazy the city hasn't really done anything about this. Although as I have argued with you before I don't think taxpayer dollars should go to care of a cemetery when we have so many issues for living citizens in the city. I don't understand people's obsession with cemeteries. Dead people don't need anything. And I include Hollywood cemetery in that as well. Cemeteries are a complete waste of space and resources.
lunar_unit t1_j1g2grp wrote
But the cemeteries are there, and are culturally and historically important. Either we dig everyone up and move them, which is not gonna happen, for lots of good reasons, so we need to take care of them, rather than let them fall into disrepair.
The Amityville Horror illustrates what happens when you build a subdivision over an inconvenient cemetery. š
Thickensick t1_j1gml3x wrote
Wasnāt that poltergeist?
bird_bitch t1_j1fn6sc wrote
Yes, I get his newsletter every week and itās a great read!!
fusion260 t1_j1eo3id wrote
Spoiler alert: itās an article by Brian Palmer, so itās about as partial as one can get.
sleevieb t1_j1fc347 wrote
what his deal?
Slight_Masterpiece78 OP t1_j1eox0x wrote
But are there errors in the article? š¤·
SonicBoris t1_j1f7oj2 wrote
He is the absolute best person to write about this subject. Few people know more about it than he does.
Slight_Masterpiece78 OP t1_j1gx4gx wrote
šÆ
spillsomepaint t1_j1fx9vx wrote
Additional context please.
Richmondisjustok t1_j1hsw13 wrote
Palmer is a founding member of an organization that sought to receive the dedicated state funding that was intended to care for the east end cemetery. Unfortunately, that organization didnāt have the resources or legal standing to receive the funding. When Enrichmond was recognized as the recipient of the funding, his organization sabotaged any attempt of cooperation with Enrichmond. While Enrichmond should never have been the financial and operational steward of the cemetery, the friends of east end did not help their own cause in this instance.
rabbiferret t1_j1kfp1n wrote
>When Enrichmond was recognized as the recipient of the funding, his organization sabotaged any attempt of cooperation with Enrichmond.
This kerfuffle wasn't without results. It gained a lot of media attention and led to the city suspending all funding to enrichmond for all of their cemetery programs, not just the one with the drama and dispute. I don't remember reading that it was ever resumed, but that's not the kind of thing that makes the news, or that I would look for. I just remember thinking that was probably the end of the foundation. It also happened around the time that human remains were found (somewhere they shouldn't have been?).
Richmondisjustok t1_j1krycn wrote
The discovery of human remains was another incident where the friends of east end used a tragedy to exploit circumstances in their favor. Enrichmond staff discovered exposed human remains at the cemetery - a cemetery that had been neglected for years.
Sadly, there had been years of rain and erosion in the area and no one to care for the land or mitigate the land disturbances. Enrichmond became the steward and started clearing the overgrown weeds when they discovered exposed remains. It was reported in local news and the friends of east end decried desecration on the part of Enrichmond staff.
Slight_Masterpiece78 OP t1_j1mfsn1 wrote
How did the Enrichmond Foundation handle the discovery of human remains at the cemetery? It's outlined quiet nicely here by a VCU professor - titled: "Three minutes each at the horror show" - who, among colleagues and descendants and community members, attended Enrichmond's "community conversation" hosted by DHR. Everything Enrichmond (or perhaps Sydnor?) could have done to further deteriorate the trust of the descendant community, they did so spectacularly.
https://www.richmondcemeteries.org/2020/10/26/three-minutes-each-at-the-horror-show/
Richmondisjustok t1_j1pszl1 wrote
Iād argue there is a lot of context missing and assumptions made by an author trying to sell books with sensationalism while simultaneously working for an institution that has played one of the strongest hands in desecrating African burial grounds and done little to nothing to right their wrongs.
āaround the same time that the Foundation had blocked longtime volunteer leaders from continuing work there.ā
This is misleading. Enrichmond asked the FOEE to sign waivers while working at the cemetery. A very common practice for liability issues. FOEE refused to sign the waivers and weāre not given permission to continue their work on the property.
āImagine the news media arrived on the site that day, where staff of the Enrichmond Foundation allowed reporters to photograph and then broadcast images of those exposed remains.ā
Come on, do you really think Enrichmond has the power/influence to tell reporters what to broadcast?
āImages of the bones would linger on the television stationās website for days.ā
Again, this isnāt something Enrichmond has jurisdiction over but that conflicts with Dr. Smithās outrage narrative.
Smith then goes on, and nauseam, about the structure of the public meeting. No real examples of actual maliciousness here, just personal criticisms of how the virtual public meeting was set up.
āFurther, these new findings at East End Cemetery, and their mishandling by Enrichmond, point to this same pattern of fumbling the discovery of such remains and making the awful situation even worse.ā
Mishandling by Enrichmond? What is the appropriate course of action? They called DHR, the police, and set up a public meeting with descendants of the cemetery to let them know the details of the discovery.
āImagine having prepared a question about whether Enrichmondās staff should have sought continuity in their handling of newly discovered remains with the previous 7 years of volunteer procedures on the site. Now that question sounds beside the point given the gravity of the revelations.ā
āThe gravity of the revelations?ā I thought everyone was well aware of the grave robbing and desecration of cemeteries in Richmond.
A lot of sensationalism in this piece. If Dr. Smith wants to take an organization to task perhaps he should start with his employer and implore them to take corrective action for building a parking garage over the discovery of remains at MCV. Push them to get more involved in local calamities like this rather than spend their time building parking lots, student housing, and athletic facilities.
Slight_Masterpiece78 OP t1_j1qjf4g wrote
This isn't the only blog post from the professor on this subject - I read his entries from before and after his Oct 2020 post, which gives an even more troubling pattern of Enrichmond's downward spiral.
"Iād argue there is a lot of context missing and assumptions made by an author trying to sell books with sensationalism while simultaneously working for an institution that has played one of the strongest hands in desecrating African trial grounds and done little to nothing to right their wrongs."Ā
Don't tenured-tract and/or tenured university professors have to publish (e.g., books)? In turn, isn't one of theĀ components in publishing a book to sell the book? I attended the reading of this public history professor's book at Chop Suey a few years back, it was eye-opening (but not surprising) to learn the heavy and far-reaching impact of how racial segregation shaped laws, architecture, city planning, businesses, etc. of Richmond. Interesting juxtaposition you make about people employed by an entity that has a long history of wrongdoing and lacking empathy or willingness to correct their wrongs. I guess this can be applied elsewhere, too...
"This is misleading. Enrichmond asked the FOEE to sign waivers while working at the cemetery. A very common practice for liability issues. FOEE refused to sign the waivers and weāre not given permission to continue their work on the property."
Liability waivers are completely normal and, I would agree, necessary. However, Enrichmond's volunteer agreement and project request form were laughable. For example, (1.) they wanted unfettered usage and ownership of all photos/videos they took of onsite volunteers. After Enrichmond's atrocious and puzzling 9/11 memorial video, why would anyone give full consent without given the option to deny? (2.) Enrichmond demanded all images of burial and grave markers within the cemetery to belong to them and volunteersĀ could not "publish any marketing or other publicity materials regarding the Cemetery without prior approval from the Organization." So, any photos taken of gravestones and other IP done by visitors, artists, academics, volunteers, reporters, etc. at the cemeteries belonged to Enrichmond. Then, permission had to be given by Enrichmond for the original creator to use. HUH?? I personally declined to sign their forms and started volunteering at Woodland Cemetery instead.
"Come on, do you really think Enrichmond has the power/influence to tell reporters what to broadcast?"
YES! A thousand times, yes! This was Enrichmond's job and responsibility, their moral and ethical duty as a "steward" and owner of the cemetery to ensure, to the best of their ability, the privacy, protection, and dignity of those buried at Evergreen and East End. Haven't these cemeteries been through enough degradation? Why Enrichmond didn't have an archaeologist, historic preservationist, or a representative from DHR participate in this broadcast to help advise and steer the conversation into a meaningful report is beyond me.
"Mishandling by Enrichmond? What is the appropriate course of action? They called DHR, the police, and set up a public meeting with descendants of the cemetery to let them know the details of the discovery."
A public meeting? What it should have been was a public discussion - John Sydnor stayed relatively silent throughout the meeting and did not answerĀ questions. What was he even doing there then? He could have provided a cardboard cutout of himself and the meeting would have commenced the same way. Enrichmond never did follow through with DHR to reinter the remains - they are now being held indefinitely in DHR's lab.
āThe gravity of the revelations?ā I thought everyone was well aware of the grave robbing and desecration of cemeteries in Richmond."
Does this make it no less a gravity of revelations? An abhorrent discovery? A tragedy to hear and witness? There had been no confirmed reports of grave robbing at Evergreen and East End. Why did Enrichmond and DHR feel this was the best time to relay this news to descendants? According to the professor's blog, this was an emotional bomb. The reasons theĀ descendants showed up to the meeting in the first place was to discuss other associated issues. Perhaps a separate, more intimate setting would have been best? This is how Enrichmond continued to fumble over themselvesĀ in very common sense situations.Ā
Staff and students from VCU and UR have been active at these cemeteries for several years (via a simple Google search), even forming a joint-university collaboratory to address cemeteries issues in the classrooms:
https://news.vcu.edu/article/At_community_gathering_UR_and_VCU_to_unveil_digital_map_of_East
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14649357.2022.2113557Ā
AutoModerator t1_j1qjf5t wrote
Welcome to RVA! This fast-growing community values positive, helpful contributions, in between occasional civil discourse. Because your account's karma (reputation in Reddit terms) is so low, our automoderator has temporarily hidden your post until our human moderators have reviewed it first. In the meantime, please read our wiki on the subreddit's rules and how your account can gain positive karma. Then, if you believe this automatic action is in error, please contact the moderators.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
juwanna-blomie t1_j1grfhn wrote
Never forget: https://youtu.be/t-NV5z5itZs
Slight_Masterpiece78 OP t1_j1gws00 wrote
I remember this - absolute absurdity by Enrichmond! They ended up blaming a volunteer for creating this...yet, they posted it all over their social media accounts š¤
throwawaySpikesHelp t1_j1hjvhv wrote
They FTX'd a ton of the local charities using them as a place to hold donations. They mixed the local charity money with their own money against the contracts with those charities and rugpulled the local charity money in the end. This shady as shit nonprofit was run by thieves, and those responsible deserve jail.
Richmondisjustok t1_j1hqsc4 wrote
The sexual tension between Brian Palmer and Michael Paul Williams is becoming unbearable.
At least Palmer is directing his attacks towards the city, the Enrichmond board, and higher levels of government instead of bullying underpaid, overworked nonprofit staffers.
Slight_Masterpiece78 OP t1_j1i1v22 wrote
Why? Because Williams and Palmer both reported (ya know, as reporters) that Enrichmond did a shatty job at their job? If so, then the community at large has a ravenous rapport with them, too.
Richmondisjustok t1_j1pt9u2 wrote
I donāt know why the sexual tension is so palpable. I can only speculate.
Slight_Masterpiece78 OP t1_j1qd29b wrote
Fair enough. We each decide what we want to spend our free time speculating on, I guess.
dreww4546 t1_j1f46pz wrote
I used to run a park group, and served in a volunteer advisory capacity with Enrichmond (I moved and resigned 6 years ago).
I got to know the staff quite well and will say that I seriously doubt that their collapse was due to anything other than a bad accounting system and being in over their heads.
I know at one point they were pushed by the city to buy some islands in the James, with no advance notice. And, they were blamed for the 17th street farmers market fiasco but were never given any real input into how that project ran. As for the Apple cider Grove in chimborozo, the neighbor didn't want it, the donor didn't fund it, and it would have been illegal for them to plant a Grove of trees reserved for their business use in a city park.
As the article suggests, I think the city is equally to blame in this fiasco and I truly hope they step in and make the partner groups whole again.