Glenn moyer
Thu, 04 Feb 2010 06:40:21 -0800
Clark Park Revitalization Plan , 2000-2003 AD The Architectural Design Firm: Originally chosen to redesign Clark Park, Simone, et al., had initially been provided a false description of the West Philly community by institutional power brokers. However, the architectural firm professionally engaged the community of residents and stakeholders, as directed in their contract, and courageously reported their findings at open public meetings. Here are their important findings: Findings Reported Publicly at 3rd Public Meeting: Local residents, who actually used Clark Park at the beginning of the millennium, felt extremely safe and crime free during normal operating hours. The vast majority of residents and park users strongly believed that the park was a vital treasure for the community and functioned like a town square. Residents asserted that the park was designed very well for the wide variety of community users, and the vast majority of them, did not want the park redesigned to support real estate marketing! (The consensus emerged that dedicated maintenance was necessary in Clark Park, but fundamental changes to the infrastructure or tree canopy were extremely unpopular.) Local residents, who attended the 3 open public meetings hosted by Simone et al., also overwhelmingly rejected the closed hand-picked gang crafting the plot, secretly, in a master plan steering committee with Penn’s marketing entity, UCD. Consequently, a motion to rescind the FOCP board approval of the UCD master plan was offered to the FOCP membership by a local Republican ward leader. The proponents of the unpopular UCD plan assured the FOCP membership that the redesign “plan was dead” and promised a competent inclusive process, if parts of the plan were ever to be implemented in the future! (The argument: Vast community opposition was too late. UCD and the proponents of the secret process had spent all of the planning money. The rejected plan was claimed to be important for future grant applications.) Additional Supporting Evidence for Findings: The FOCP organization produced “survey data” demanding action against multiple park user groups and organizations because the FOCP claimed that Clark Park was “the most used park in the city” and was in fact “overused.” However, the official history and portrayal of Clark park, as a deserted but crime infested wasteland, was repeatedly promoted throughout the region and country by the powerful institutional propaganda machine and the FOCP newsletter. Ironically, the secret FOCP claims of “overuse” supported the findings and professionalism of the architectural firm, while contradicting the massive propaganda based on obvious lies; of an unused wasteland, populated only by criminal gangs. (The redesign firm used appropriate and accepted methods for honestly engaging a diverse community and set of stakeholders. Their efforts were sidetracked repeatedly, yet the overwhelming community opposition and true history shined through the sabotage.) Citizens, The great historian, Howard Zinn, demonstrated that official histories controlled by ruling power brokers are usually far from accurate. Manufactured official histories are often based on misrepresentations and deliberate exclusion of vital data. Zinn exposed these tendencies in the macro history of the USA, and the same paradigm can be uncloaked in micro-centers of power, such as the university city district. Over the past 8-10 years, an official history of Clark Park has been manufactured to justify the transfer of control of Clark Park to moneyed power brokers, unaccountable to the public and the West Philadelphia neighborhood, where the park is located. Recently reasserted publicly, by the leadership of the Friends of Clark Park as part of the “Glenn’s Whores” series; the official history of Clark Park, manufactured from 1999-2003, is that of a dangerous deserted wasteland over run by various criminal gangs and criminal activities. Officially, it was a place so awful that all law abiding residents abhorred and avoided Clark Park, while demanding a moneyed savior to take control away from city government and ban inclusion of local stakeholders. “The community,” led by a tiny group of superior citizens (aka the anointed), demanded a complete demolition and redesign of the park to push the illegal mobs away through “improvements” in the design of the park. This history is completely fraudulent. Because the redesign plan was met by overwhelming community opposition, the plan was placed into a holding pattern, which is a common tactic used against public opposition during corporate takeovers of communities! (A Business Improvement District proposal to illegally tax the community, and transfer money to Penn's marketing agency, is currently in such a holding pattern.) When the park redesign plot was reintroduced several years later in 2007, an iron grip over the same secret process coincided with reintroducing the official manufactured history. Some opponents of the take over of a public park were targeted by a variety of personal attacks, and others were co-opted over the years in private “coffee meetings” away from the eyes and ears of the general public. During those years, a general resignation and sense of helplessness seemed to permeate mainstream middle class consumers in the neighborhood. “Penn gets what it wants,” became one of the commonly held and often repeated beliefs heard in the once great and vibrant community. The importance of the betrayal of civic associations was downplayed as learned helplessness developed. A People’s History of Clark Park, An Introduction by Glenn Moyer (Mr. Moyer is a citizen journalist and anti-fascist activist, who became radicalized through the study of dysfunctional civic association gangs and the study of the corporate gentrification process.) ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.