Disabled activists have asked why the government is refusing to answer key questions about severe cuts to the support packages of former users of the Independent Living Fund (ILF).Both the Department of Health (DH) – which is responsible for social care policy – and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) have refused to say whether they are monitoring the impact of the fund’s closure on disabled people.Disability News Service (DNS) has already reported on two local authorities where former ILF-users have seen their support packages slashed since the fund closed.ILF was funded by the Department for Work and Pensions and when it closed on 30 June was helping nearly 17, 000 disabled people with the highest support needs to live independently.But the coalition government decided that it should be scrapped, promising instead that nine months’ worth of non-ring-fenced funding would be transferred through DCLG to councils in England, and to devolved governments in Wales and Scotland.This transition process has been hit by reports of cuts to the care packages of former ILF-users, but both DH and DCLG are refusing to answer key questions about the measures they have taken to ensure their support.Among the questions they refuse to answer are: whether they are concerned about reports of former ILF-users facing significant cuts to their support; how they see the overall picture across England since the fund closed; and whether they are making any attempts to monitor the impact of closure on former ILF-users.They have also refused to confirm – as alleged by at least one local authority – that DCLG did not pass on the full equivalent of the annual support that would previously have been paid to each ILF-user, but instead cut it by three per cent.Linda Burnip, co-founder of Disabled People Against Cuts, said: “The refusal of DCLG and DH to answer even a few simple questions about the transfer process surrounding the closure of the ILF implies that they have something that they want to hide; otherwise there would be no need for this complete lack of transparency.”And Tracey Lazard, chief executive of Inclusion London, said: “Central government seems to have tried to wash its hands of all responsibility for meeting the social care support needs for former ILF recipients, but we will continue to hold them to account.”The closure of ILF came at a time when councils were already facing huge funding pressures, with the latest (provisional) official figures showing a three per cent decrease in real terms in adult social care spending in 2014-15, compared with 2013-14, and an eight per cent fall since 2009-10.Barbara Keeley, Labour’s shadow minister for older people, social care and carers, said: “This government’s failure to face-up to the care crisis in England has left many vulnerable people without the help and support they need.“Ministers must now come clean about whether funding passed to councils has been top-sliced, and if so how many people have had their support cut as a consequence.“It is vital that the needs of former ILF recipients are met so they can live independently and with dignity.”A DCLG spokeswoman refused to answer specific questions from DNS, but said in a statement: “We have ensured that there is sufficient funding to maintain support packages for all existing Independent Living Fund users.“We have also encouraged local authorities to use any surplus funds to provide further social care.”A DH spokeswoman also refused to answer key questions, but said in a statement: “We are committed to ensuring adults with care and support needs are properly supported by local authorities – our Care Act puts a duty on local authorities to assess and meet the eligible needs of people.”She said that 94 per cent of all former ILF-users had already been receiving some services from their local authority prior to the fund’s closure, and that “authorities will now be responsible for meeting all eligible needs for these people”. She said that DH had issued guidance to councils to help them prepare for the transfer, while the new care and support reform programme board was monitoring the impact of the Care Act. She added: “If anyone with care and support needs, including former ILF-users, are unhappy with how their needs are being met, they can use the complaints procedure or take their concern to the Local Government Ombudsman.”But one local authority, Waltham Forest, in London, has confirmed to Disability News Service that its ILF transition funding was cut by three per cent by DCLG before it was handed over.A Waltham Forest council spokeswoman said: “When the government transferred ILF funding to the council, the overall funding amount was reduced by three per cent… this was intended to allow for overall expected changes in client circumstances.“The DCLG will need to comment on why they decided to reduce the funding by three per cent – this was their decision.”Waltham Forest is one of the councils where there have been severe cuts to support, with 53 of 60 former ILF-users seeing their packages cut after being reassessed.The council spokeswoman said: “We have reviewed everyone receiving a service and depending on a person’s current individual circumstances, some people will receive less support and others will receive more.“Everyone goes through the same assessment process to ensure that packages are allocated fairly and by current need.“Our intention is to ensure the funding is being used by everyone who needs it, in a way that can meet those needs, not simply to pass the funding on to individuals based on an old assessment of their needs which may no longer reflect their current situation.”She added: “We also advise individuals of their right to appeal if they have concerns about their care and support and will carefully review each decision on a case-by-case basis.”
“I feel like there’s a fire every month now. It’s so unfortunate that the people who are being displaced are the ones who can least afford it,” she said.Edwin Ayala, who works at a store around the corner, said he was worried for a friend who lives in the building, who recently suffered a car accident and is immobile. He was relieved to hear there were no injuries, and hoped his friend’s unit was unaffected.Photo by Michael JohnsonPhoto by Michael JohnsonPhoto by Michael JohnsonPhoto by Michael JohnsonPhoto by Michael Johnson Residential fire on Cypress alley at 24th street at. No injuries, residents have been evacuated @MLNow pic.twitter.com/6l6VX59Xzb— Laura Waxmann (@laura_waxee) March 16, 2016 0% A small fire broke out around 4:15 p.m. on Wednesday inside a 10-unit building on Cypress Alley near 24th Street. The fire caused no injuries, but did enough damage to the building that a handful of residents will not be able to return.Division Chief Kirk Richardson said one person was displaced from the damaged unit, but couldn’t confirm the total number of displaced tenants with certainty. The remaining units still have electrical service, and tenants could return if they wanted to, Richardson said.The fire originated in a room on the second floor of the building, said Battalion Chief Ray Guzman, and is now under investigation.Melissa Moore, a Folsom Street resident, lamented the frequency of fires in the neighborhood. Tags: Fires • housing Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0%
Gary McCoy, policy and community affairs manager at Parks and Rec, said that in the next few weeks they will install new signs listing rules and regulations, and in the coming months the department plans to resurface the park’s athletic courts. He also said the department is “exploring” options for replacing the existing fencing around the park with “black metal” fencing.“The police department has said it would be able to better coordinate with Parks and Rec once signage is up,” McCoy said.While these improvements will make the park safer, the sex workers on Shotwell Street will likely remain.“It’s not quite as easy for us — it’s hit and miss,” said Griffin. “We come out, we do enforcement actions, and the next day we’re right back to where we were before. So that’s a little more complex.”“How are we going to tackle the man problem?” asked Andrea Scarabelli, referring to the pimps and johns who hang out on Shotwell between 17th and 22nd Streets.Residents are part of the solution, said Justine Cephus, an assistant district attorney assigned to the Mission District. They must call the station to report sex-worker activity. Every call is “logged, recorded, and documented.”“I personally know from my own experience how frustrating it can be to feel like there’s no response,” she said, while noting every call can help her office build a case.“So please don’t give up calling,” she said. When asked later how these calls were used to build a case, Cephus said she would have to get clearance from the press office to explain further. (We will add her response once that clearance comes through.)Carolina Morales, an aide to District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen, said her office — in partnership with the city’s Department on the Status of Women and the police department — secured funding for a sex-work intervention team.At some point, a van and outreach workers will be riding around the neighborhood from 2 a.m. to 5 a.m. to prevent women — especially minors — from being exploited.Morales did not specify how much funding was secured, how large the team would be, and when precisely the van would start its work.Others, like Joyce Ferman, who lives on 21st and Shotwell streets wondered if the police could deploy foot patrols in the area. She knew they were being deployed around the 16th and 24th Street BART stations, she said, but what about Shotwell Street?“If we had someone foot patrolling Shotwell street between 22nd and 17th — that’s where all the evil stuff is going on,” said Ferman.“There are a lot of people who want foot beats,” Griffin said, explaining that despite Police Chief Bill Scott announcing a quadrupling of foot patrols in the Mission, they are still both limited and in high demand.On average, he said, he has a total of six officers working two shifts in the Mission, which also includes the Castro. “I don’t have a limitless number of officers.”The Mission police district. Courtesy of the SFPDHe said, however, that more bike patrol officers could be the answer. “You cover more area, and I think you’re going to see that,” he said. “I think it’s reasonable.”At times, the crowd grew so eager Griffin could not finish his sentences. At one point he asked: “What’s the solution? Is it parking cops down here in the middle of night? Is that what I need to do?”“Yes,” said many in the room.A homeless encampment surrounding the park has also become a problem, residents said.“I really haven’t seen any visits [by the Homeless Outreach Team],” said Shawn Case, who lives at 21st and Shotwell streets. “I’m just wondering if there are visits right now and, if not, will they be starting?”Randy Quezada, from the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, enumerated the work they have been doing in the Mission and said the park is a mixed area “with people who are hanging out and not necessarily camping.”“We have been able to connect with those people, and with people who have accepted services at the navigation center,” he said adding, “There is still work to be done.” Tags: police • prostitution • shotwell street Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% 0% Jose Coronado Playground at 21st and Shotwell streets will soon be getting new trees, signage and resurfaced athletic courts — but the sex workers, johns and pimps that neighbors have long complained about are unlikely to leave anytime soon.Captain Bill Griffin from Mission Station said the prostitution is not as “linear” as citing loiterers around the park. And it became clear at a community meeting Wednesday night, attended by some 40 neighbors, that the longstanding issue is also not as easy as planting a tree, resurfacing courts or adding signage — all of which the Fix-It Team plans for Jose Coronado Playground.The team is a coordinated effort among city departments and led by a liaison from the Mayor’s Office.The acacias surrounding the park will be removed in 30 days, said Sandra Zuniga, the Mayor’s Office liaison. It will be replaced with other trees that are yet to be determined.
Mission Critter, which has helped the neighborhood hand pick the best pet foods and products for the Mission’s furry friends for the last five years, will close at the end of the month. That’s according to Tim Costigan, who owns and operates the store at 2959 Mission St. near 25th Street.Even winning the SF Weekly’s award for Best Pet Store of 2018 could not save Mission Critter from the onslaught of e-commerce. “It’s different now, because a good neighborhood pet shop used to be where you could get quality pet food versus the stuff you get at Safeway. Now, you can get super quality brands everywhere,” said Costigan.Nowadays, “everywhere” means “online.” Tags: Business • pets Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% 0% Subscribe to Mission Local’s daily newsletterEmail Address “People can buy everything on Chewy[.com], even though your local store will order it for you,” he said of the online retailer that is owned by PetSmart. It “can stock everything. I can’t,” he added, his four-year-old adopted cat, Louise, sleeping nearby.“Sentimentally, I love this. I love the people that come in with their dogs. It was just a balm to my soul after the nonprofit life, where I hit a wall,” he recalls. When he opened up shop in October 2013, he says there was no other pet shop in the Mission, although every other neighborhood had a local pet store. “In retrospect, maybe there’s a reason there wasn’t one in the Mission,” he said. Bernie’s, a pet and former grooming shop, operated on in the Mission from 1989 to 2006, when it partnered with SF Animal and Care Control. Customers at Mission Critter talked about the relationships that they — and their pets — had developed with Costigan. When Alexa Trevino’s shih tzu Gorda sees the pet store owner on the street, she “follows him because he [Costigan] keeps treats in his pocket.” Trevino said she’s not an online shopper, because she’s also a small business owner who runs Artillery AG down the street, and she knows the impact of shopping locally. Daniel Beery, who came in to stock up for his newly adopted cat, asked Costigan, “What’s aspic?”Costigan knew the answer. “So aspic is just, when you open the can, there’s gelatin stuff on top, its extremely flavorful, it’s literally meat Jello! For a cat, it’s like Woah!” “Hahaha! Okay great!” said Beery.Louise, Costigan’s adopted cat, is said to be the real boss of pet store Mission Critter. Photo by Mallory Newman.Costigan spends his days patiently answering such questions. When asked about his favorite memory at the shop, Costigan took a long pause. He stared intently at his hand, contemplated deeply for a moment as if wrestling internally.“All the dogs … ” he said as he choked up and stepped away. “I’m sorry … ”It’s clear that shutting down a shop you poured your heart into is hard.“You build a relationship with the people and their pets,” he continued. “I’m not taking it lightly, as people might think. It’s a weird thing to make a rational business decision, but I genuinely feel a loss with what the community is losing. The last couple of weeks have been a lot of processing, but everyone is being really supportive.”Jaimie Lantz who, along with her two rescued cats and a terrier, has been a customer for years, said, “I’m a witness to the loss.” She appreciated the time Costigan brought in cat behaviorist Daniel “DQ” Quagliozzi, who shared with the crowd that most cat issues come down to dissatisfaction with the litter box. “The things we’re drawn to by living in San Francisco are the relationships,” Lantz said. “Community relationships are where we do have a modicum of safety, a modicum of political power. The local ecology … ”Tim agreed. “We’re giving it all to the web,” he said in response. “People believe their community is on Facebook. People won’t be able to recognize that it’s a lesser thing until the real thing is gone.”
You could say this statement (and the resulting article) were prescient. But, frankly, it really wasn’t so much a prediction of the future as an acknowledgement of the past. “Kamala has clearly and strategically and relentlessly been running for office for a long, long time,” another former political colleague told me four years ago. “And she wants what they all want — the next thing.” The next thing was always on the horizon. The only surprise is that it may come so soon. Sitting across the table of a Mission Street cafe, I asked a longtime former associate of Kamala Harris what lines of attack her enemies might take. This was a non-starter. “Oh no,” was the reply. “I’m not gonna antagonize her. That woman’s gonna be president.” That was in 2015. Subscribe to Mission Local’s daily newsletter With Senator Harris’ entry into the increasingly crowded field of Democratic presidential aspirants for 2020, a number of national publications have published stories detailing her up-and-down tenure here as San Francisco District Attorney and California’s Attorney General.Make no mistake, this is good and worthwhile journalism. But it’s good and worthwhile journalism built upon good and worthwhile journalism; Harris’ accomplishments (and missteps) both locally and in Sacramento were covered in quite a bit of detail during an era when more journalists were employed to work this and every beat. The details they uncovered often didn’t reflect well on our erstwhile DA and AG (See: Her former romantic interest Willie Brown placing her on $95K-a-year commissions and buoying her career; rampant ineptitude and dysfunction and cover-ups of all the above at the DNA and Crime Labs; the San Francisco DA’s office inexplicably applying for — and receiving — millions of federal dollars earmarked for border counties it was forced to pay back; this city citing the parents of truant children … and much, much more). And yet we — San Franciscans and Californians — have elected Harris to higher and higher office. And that’s because one of the many abilities Harris possesses is to appeal to voters in a manner that transcends — and even belies — her actual record. This ability applies not only to voters who’ve never met her but allies who have worked alongside her for years. “I love her as a person, because I have seen her sit up at her desk late at night and worry about powerless people in jail,” says one. And yet: “Her policy is not as strong as my love of her.” On the flip side, there are plenty of political movers and shakers in this city with very little love for Harris who are more than happy to point out the shortcomings of her policy — before casually noting, “I could still support her.” So, the net result is the same. The pitfalls of Harris’ actual record have not yet detracted from her appeal. Or her viability. That’s a pretty neat trick.Image from a film by Miki Katoni.Polls taken on the eve of Harris’ 2016 rout of Loretta Sanchez for a senate seat listed three main takeaways for voters: Harris instilled them with a “very vague, broad positive feeling”; she did a “decent-to-good job” as AG; and she is a Democrat. “Has her record ever mattered?” ponders a longtime city political player with presidential campaign experience. “Democrats have always had a resume fallacy. They like people with these jam-packed resumes. And our resume candidates get into races against GOP candidates who are good on-message.” This does not appear to have been lost on Harris. In Oakland yesterday, during her hometown kickoff rally, she was loose and upbeat. She was far more ebullient and high-energy than San Franciscans might have recalled her being 15 years ago when she won her first DA’s race. It was a boisterous speech well-tailored to today’s Democratic audiences (if you took a shot every time Harris said “fight,” you’re probably only waking up just now). She was good on-message. Harris’ demeanor and talking points (“We can do better!”) mirrored those a longtime city politico observed her make back in October during a campaign event in Reno for Nevada Senate candidate Jacky Rosen (Rosen won that race, as did so many of the candidates Harris criss-crossed the nation to support in 2018 — a wise and beneficial use of Harris’ political capital). Harris’ Reno appearance was described as “a lot more spontaneous than what we would recall here in San Francisco — and a lot more of a leftist message.” It was, per the observer, “totally obvious she was running for president.” He likened her October Nevada appearance before 100 or 200 party stalwarts to a comedian trying out new material in smaller clubs with an eye on a showcase performance.Yesterday’s Oakland crowd was estimated at 20,000, and Harris’ speech was broadcast live on several networks and pored over on the Internet afterward. Mic drop.Image from a film by Miki Katoni.One hangup for Harris is that her old material doesn’t play as well as it used to. To wit, the New York Times on Jan. 17 ran an op-ed by University of San Francisco law professor Lara Bazelon belying Harris’ claim that she was a so-called “progressive prosecutor.” The op-ed was damning. But it only reinforced much of what remedial readers of local or state news would already have known. Harris’ record on drug cases, cash bail, legal marijuana, Proposition 47, police use-of-force, and other “progressive” issues has not been stellar (in some cases, it hasn’t even been extant). Harris was furthermore elected AG on the promise of criminal justice reform, but it’s hard to argue she greatly altered the state’s status quo. And yet, it remains to be seen if this will weigh her down in a presidential contest when it failed to do so before and never has. Will a “very vague, broad positive feeling” be enough, yet again?“Does anyone think the No. 1 issue in America right now is how progressive Kamala Harris was 15 years ago?” asks one San Francisco political strategist. “Will it matter to progressives in a caucus in Iowa? I don’t think it’ll be about fact-checking. It’ll be about organizing campaigns.” Organizing campaigns is something Harris’ record is less ambiguous about. She’s solid here. California’s junior senator has, to this point, been blessed with flawed opponents who have often made strategically indefensible decisions. But she is a fierce competitor who will not be outworked. She is a voracious fund-raiser with the drive to make the asks that other candidates shy away from. She has cultivated tech barons; her picture is hanging in Caribbean restaurants in the D.C. suburbs; she counts the Obamas as personal friends. She has, in the words of one begrudging critic/admirer, “enough connections to wire all of Washington.” Additionally, competitors attempting to outflank her on the left are faced with the task of explaining to voters that, in the age of Trump, the female candidate of color isn’t progressive enough. “We had a little lab experiment on that in San Francisco,” notes one observer dryly. “It didn’t work out so well.” With her anodyne, ever-malleable messaging and access to greater and greater sources of fund-raising wealth, Kamala Harris is a stellar modern political candidate (access to wealth is, in fact, the overwhelming requirement for political success. Whether Harris’ fund-raising abilities can withstand a few lackluster primary results may remain to be seen).Separate and apart from all that, Harris may yet serve as a national Rorschach test. Voters will look at her record and see what they want to see: They may applaud her decision as DA to not charge a cop-killer with the death penalty, be dispirited by her subsequent quest as AG to enforce the death penalty — or be confused and angered by a future lurid campaign ad featuring either of the above (or undocumented immigrants gunning down San Franciscans, which has proven effective in the past). But voters may also look at Kamala Harris — the person — and see what they want to see. They will look at a smart, strong biracial woman and she will serve as a mirror for the nation. She will reflect back Americans’ negative biases about women and minorities. Or she will reflect back positive aspirations for a more inclusive nation. People will, in short, see their own political visions. Whether Americans, writ large, like what they see won’t just determine Harris’ future. It may well determine the country’s. To be continued. Image from a film by Miki Katoni. Email Address The presidential candidate’s success and appeal have always been distinct from her documented achievements
ST HELENS have been awarded a Super League Licence for the next three seasons.The Club’s application was ratified by the governing body.Joining Widnes, Super League licences were awarded to Bradford Bulls, Castleford Tigers, Catalan Dragons, Harlequins RL, Huddersfield Giants, Hull FC, Hull Kingston Rovers, Leeds Rhinos, St Helens, Salford City Reds, Wakefield Trinity Wildcats, Warrington Wolves and Wigan Warriors.Licences were not issued to Crusaders, who withdrew their application, or to Championship club Halifax RLFC, whose application was assessed alongside those of the existing Engage Super League clubs.The licences were announced at Old Trafford when RFL Chairman Richard Lewis revealed increases in the number of clubs receiving A Grade and B Grade licences.“I am delighted to confirm that four clubs (Hull FC, Leeds Rhinos, Warrington Wolves and Wigan Warriors) have been awarded A Grade licences, one more than in 2008, and that five clubs (Bradford Bulls, Catalan Dragons, Huddersfield Giants, Hull Kingston Rovers and St Helens) have been awarded B grade licences, two more than in the last round of licensing,” said Lewis. “As welcome as the improvements in grades are, it is just one element of proof that licensing is meeting its objectives of driving up standards.“Other evidence includes the prolific talent development within Super League, in which 118 young British players have made their first team debuts, and the investment in facilities we are seeing at clubs like St Helens, Hull Kingston Rovers and Salford City Reds.”Lewis said there will be no relaxation in the desire to drive up standards and has warned the clubs which have been awarded a C Grade licence that they cannot rest on their laurels.“The RFL’s independent Board of Directors reserves the right to revoke any licence awarded for the period 2012 to 2014 if it feels a club is failing, or not fulfilling, its obligations to help the competition meet the objectives of investment and growth,” he said.“This is not a new provision, but the RFL will be subjecting those clubs whose applications are largely predicated upon future undertakings or with variable performance against past promises, to more rigorous assessment during the next licence period. Membership of the Super League demands high standards.”Lewis explained that the rigorous assessment process to which the licence application of every club is subjected had prompted the decision by Crusaders to withdraw their application.“As part of the on-going scrutiny applied by the thoroughness of the licensing process Crusaders decided to withdraw their Licence application,” he said. “The RFL will now enter into discussions with Crusaders regarding their possible participation in the Co-operative Championship.The licence grades awarded for 2012 to 2014 are as follows (current licence grading in brackets):B – Bradford Bulls (B)C – Castleford Tigers (C)B – Catalan Dragons (C)C – Harlequins RL (C)B – Huddersfield Giants (C)A – Hull FC (A)B – Hull Kingston Rovers (C)A – Leeds Rhinos (A)B – St Helens (B)C – Salford City Reds (C)A – Warrington Wolves (A)C – Wakefield Trinity Wildcats (C)C – Widnes Vikings (-)A – Wigan Warriors (B)
SAINTS’ Fifth Round Tetley’s Challenge Cup tie at Leeds Rhinos will take place on Saturday April 26 at 2.30pm.Tickets for the game will go on sale this Friday at 9am.Junior Season Ticket Holders can get into the game for free but they need to collect their match ticket before they travel.Prices will be:AdultAdult STHConcessionConcession STHJuniorJunior STHWest Terrace£20£17£13£10£5FREEPaddock£20£17£13£10£5FREEMain Stand£27£24£20£17£12FREESeason Ticket Prices are only applicable up until 12pm before matchday and concessions are classed as seniors aged 65 and over, students, Under 21s and Disabled. Juniors are classed as 16 and under.
SAINTS unbeaten Reserves will take on Wigan for the second time this season on Thursday night.The two sides met earlier in the year with Ian Talbot’s men winning 38-14.Entry for the game at the Ad-Options Community Stadium in Orrell is £5 for adults and £3 for concessions.Kick-off is 6.30pm.The squad for the game is:Ben Morris, Brad Billsborough, Dave Llewellyn, Jack Ashworth, Jake Spedding, Joe Greenwood, Jonah Cunningham, Levy Nzoungou, Lewis Charnock, Matty Fleming, Olly Davies, Regan Grace, Ricky Bailey, Ross McCauley, Tom Connick, Tom Whittle, Tommi Hughes (pictured), Tony Suffolk and Travis Burns.
Originally appointed in February 2016, Bennett led the team in the 2016 Four Nations tournament, 2017 Pacific Test victory over Samoa and to the 2017 Rugby League World Cup final – England’s first in 22 years.After a successful 2017 World Cup campaign, Bennett’s two-year contract will see him take charge of the national side for the International Series against New Zealand in 2018 and also for any Great Britain tour in 2019.On his two-year extension, Bennett, said: “It was disappointing not to be lifting the World Cup last December, but I mentioned about this squad being on a journey. I want to continue that journey because I firmly believe we can achieve something special together.“It’s a pleasure to coach this squad because everyone wants to do their best for one another and do their job properly. The last couple of years have been encouraging and I have seen this group grow in confidence and belief.“There’s plenty of work to be done and club fixtures to be played between now and the New Zealand games – everyone is aware of what is required of them to join the England programme.”In addition to Wayne Bennett, other England coaches appointed to new two-year contracts are: Paul Anderson (England Knights), Craig Richards (England Women), Mark Roughsedge (England Wheelchair), Dave Elliott (England Academy) and Danny Wilson (England Youth).
The speed limit on Shipyard Boulevard will drop from 50mph to 45mph. Drivers on Kerr Ave. in Wilmington (Photo: Basil John/WWAY) WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) — The speed limits will drop on two Wilmington roads after a vote from Wilmington City Council on Tuesday night.Kerr Avenue will drop from 45mph to 35mph from the Martin Luther King Jr Parkway to South College Road.- Advertisement –