Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
share
email
print
reprint
font size
options
 
CLEM MURRAY / Staff Photographer
A hippo and a boy meet at Adventure Aquarium. The biggest chunk of state-takeover recovery funds - $25 million - went to help expand the waterfront attraction in the nation's poorest medium-sized city.
1 of 11
READER FEEDBACK
Post a comment
RELATED STORIES
 
The promise and the price: Special multi-media presentation.
 
Camden Rebirth: A promise unfulfilled
 
How the Firms Know to Donate
 
Photo gallery: Camden's Stalled Rebirth
 
How This Series Was Produced
 
Camden's waterfront - and its woes
 
Photo gallery: Camden's waterfront and its woes
 
Despite aquarium's promises, Camden pupils paid to play
 
Camden's Rebirth: Some areas helped; others still struggle
 
Photo gallery: Recovery aids some areas
 
Despite aquarium's promises, Camden pupils paid to play
 
Christie: Let Camden run itself; takeover a 'failure'
 
Lesson for Camden: How a state takeover revitalized a city
 
Photo gallery: How a state takeover revitalized a city
 
Regional opposition helped Camden fail


Camden's waterfront - and its woes

N.J. vowed to revitalize the city. Today, job numbers are largely unchanged, but millions have gone to such "anchors" as Cooper, Campbell's, and the aquarium.

Second of four parts

Thanks to $25 million in recovery money, America's poorest city now has hippos.

The landmark 2002 Municipal Rehabilitation and Economic Recovery Act that put Camden under state control set aside $175 million for dozens of city projects. And none was larger, or more emblematic, than the $25 million expansion of the 10-year-old, state-owned aquarium.

The money bought the city a privatized aquarium with hippos, sharks, and a West African aviary. But it did not affect Camden's median income, the lowest of any medium-sized American city.

"Give us jobs, fix our schools," said Angel Cordero, a community activist. "Don't give us fish, let us fish."

Camden's residents were told the recovery would help to lift them out of poverty. The state's "strategic revitalization plan," the recovery's guide, even listed jobs as the No. 1 goal.

But it didn't turn out that way. Instead, most of the bailout money, $99 million, was allocated to the aquarium and other "anchor" institutions: tourist attractions, universities, hospitals, and government agencies.

"There was a trade-off," said Rutgers-Camden's Howard Gillette Jr.

"They gave some money to help expand the aquarium, but they expected something in return. They wanted private investment, and it's come very slowly. That's been the turnkey on each of these things - to get the private sector to do things that the public sector couldn't do."

Seven years later, these institutions have failed to create many jobs for residents or tax ratables for the city. Camden is far more dependent on state aid than before.

The law followed an old strategy of aiding the city by subsidizing its strengths, like the waterfront: Once the waterfront looked good, Camden's reputation would improve, luring investors, residents, and jobs.

"The waterfront has to be the engine of economic development," says Assembly Speaker Joseph J. Roberts Jr., a recovery-law sponsor. "That's a gem. Patience has been tested, there's no question about it, but I think that's important."

Beyond the waterfront, the city's health and educational institutions - using an approach similar to the University of Pennsylvania's - were to be the newest saviors, with $31 million devoted to "eds and meds," including three colleges, two hospitals, and a planned medical school.

The expansion of two hospitals and Camden County College has clearly benefited city residents in direct ways. But it is unclear if such growth couldn't have happened without the state's extraordinary move of suspending the powers of the City Council and the mayor.

Roberts believes the takeover created the groundwork for the city's growth as a center of education and health care, and it has triggered so much else, like the recent closing of the state prison in North Camden.

"Has Camden been transformed as a city? Of course it has," he said.

Not according to the Rev. Willie Anderson.

"They've been giving us that crap for the last 30 years," said Anderson, chairman of Camden Churches Organized for People, which once supported the takeover. "The city looks worse than ever."

More than 40 percent of the population is living under the poverty line, and the tax base has shrunk.

Camden is the second most dangerous city in America and the poorest medium-sized city, according to national rankings. The city of 70,390 had 1,791 violent crimes in 2008, compared to 1,711 the year before the recovery began.

Page:   1  of  7  View All
1 |   2 |   3 |   4 |   5 |   6 |   7      Next»
Comments   
Posted 07:32 AM, 11/09/2009
progressivepat
Typical results of Democrat spending of other people's money. That is to say, no results and a request for more money
Posted 08:21 AM, 11/09/2009
Palestra Jon
Nice partisan comment, since virtually all of the waterfront development commenced under Republican leadership. Urban decay is caused neither by Democrats nor Republicans. There is the same economic dynamic that has led to dead zones in North Philadelphia, the River Wards, Camden, and large swaths of land in North Jersey as well (Patterson, Passaic, etc.). The old factory towns are dead, because manufacturing is dead. The only people to live in the old factory areas are those who could not get out, and not surprisingly, they are in the greatest need of social programs, education, jobs and housing. If your statement really is that we should abandon these people to their fate, you are a heartless SOB. The "free market" has not and cannot help them. That is the point of the article. But let's not throw out Limbaugh-like rhetoric...the Dems and the Republicans are equal in the "play to pay" department. I am with you that corruption should be weeded out, but doubtful that that will occur in our lifetimes.
Posted 09:25 AM, 11/09/2009
keith97btown
how come Republicans haven't ran for mayor in either 1) Camden, or 2) Trenton?
Posted 09:25 AM, 11/09/2009
keith97btown
how come Republicans haven't ran for mayor in either 1) Camden, or 2) Trenton?
Posted 09:29 AM, 11/09/2009
albertpa
Palestra... Agreed. A bi-partisan effort has to decrease the viability of Camden. I still believe that the tearing down of the prison will help to stabilize North Camden, but its difficult to imagine just how the city will fix its problems. Frankly, given the dire situation of the city, $175M was and is kind of an insult. That said, you have to starty somewhere.
Posted 09:32 AM, 11/09/2009
xi_lives
Money down a rathole...just like the trillion dollar stimulus.
Posted 09:39 AM, 11/09/2009
Flyersfan76
hey xi...typical of people like you. Where are your ideas you punk? Your solution is to $h.it all over the ideas being enacted and offer none of your own. Please f.unk off.
Posted 09:53 AM, 11/09/2009
Poppys
Many have tried for decades to cure Camden. What has the gotten us all? Dems, Reps, black white...no plan has worked. So if each of these leading the charge has failed, then what is the constant? Remove the variable of WHO is trying to help Camden, and what constant are you left with? Residents. The residents have not changed. Success has still eluded them. So despite these decade long grandiose plans, poverty and crime prevail. Since you cannot change the residents, then change who the residents always vote for. Dems have held power for those decades, and please don't tell me that manufacturing has left. The US has transformed from agrarian, to industrial, to now high tech elsewhere. Camden fails due to its representatives. All of them; city, county, state. And it always will unless a wholesale change is made to those who represent Camden.
Posted 10:01 AM, 11/09/2009
force10
Gosh, I wonder if dredging the Delaware and increasing shipping to Camden would help create jobs?
Posted 10:12 AM, 11/09/2009
bobcitydoc
Funny how this story completely ignores the big urban redevelopment idea of the republicans (and their Clinton era apologists) the enterprise-empowerment zone, which Camden shared with Philadelphia. A very simple (on paper at least) solution here is to invest in the city's basic infrastructure and make every effort to train city youth to participate in these projects (which seems to be the underlying theme of this series). The city had to reinvest in its growth industries, (EDs, Meds and tourism), but its tourism sector has virtually no real economic impact (especially compared to Philadelphia) due to the lack of conventions and overnight stays in the city. The city needs to be better linked to the economy of Philadelphia rather than its suburban New Jersey neighbors. They need to build a cost advantage for economic sectors that can actually engage their youth in formal employment. In other words, they need a targeted anti-poverty plan. (and I would do as NYC did, focus on the city's youth).
Posted 10:17 AM, 11/09/2009
James
To create true stimulus funding by way of improved housing, there has to be a demand for housing from highly paid professional people. And there must be infrastructure improvements in water, sewer, electrical and cable for entertainment/internet. For those people to want to live in Camden's choicest waterfront district, there has to be a reduction in crime and improvement in the public schools. Conditions must be made ripe for private schools to invest in Camden to compete with public schools. And, finally, there must be a permanent silence on cries of gentrification from poorer residents who feel shoehorned out or their culture changed by the nouveau rich. That is what killed the Cherokee development that included a PGA Tour golf course. If Camden's poor feel contented with discriminating against professional people who bring an improving lifestyle to the community, then they will continue to live in such squalor.
Posted 10:47 AM, 11/09/2009
2012 ~ Ron Paul
Camden isn't safe because of the people that live there. Throwing money at destroyed city isn't the answer.
Posted 11:01 AM, 11/09/2009
Ilmare
Honestly, I don't see too much of a problem in investing in the few redeeming qualities of that sad city. It produces income, which is taxable. Tourists are a good source of income. They buy stuff, have to pay for parking, get fined (occasionally), pay tolls, buy food, etc. I think it's good to focus on their strong points (they don't have much else to bank on) and allow opportunities for other people to try and get business from aquarium visitors. Of course, I've always liked zoos/aquariums/science centers. Besides, most of Camden's problems aren't fixable simply through throwing money at it. Try asking a sociologist rather than an economist.
Comment removed.
Posted 02:21 PM, 11/09/2009
Oak31
Yes, it is ironic that everyone gets blamed for Camden's probelems, except the people that are causing the problems - the crime, the grafitti, the murders, the blight, the trash and letter...its the RESIDENTS! Why do people such as myself, who are law-abiding, work hard, obtained an education, and maintain a respectable home supposed to continue to pay for the trash that inhabits Camden? I know this is harsh but I'm tired of the liberal notion that the plight of a community is always SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT!
  • Jobs
  • Cars
  • Real Estate
  • Rentals
 
SEARCH JOBS
Spotlight Deal
Old City/Society Hill 19106
Spotlight Deal
Torresdale 19114
SEARCH REAL ESTATE
Spotlight Deal
Manayunk 19127
Spotlight Deal
Manayunk 19127
SEARCH RENTALS
Daily Headlines
Subscribe now! Daily Headlines Newsletter