[UC] All of UC goes on sale this Saturday!

[Andrew Schwalm]

You're already getting your spare change together for the de Sales Parish
Porch Sale and the Clark Park Peoples' Flea Market this Saturday, so you
might as well keep on heading West where the Concerned Citizens of the 5000
Block of Osage Ave. will be holding a block-wide porch sale!  It's from 9am
to 3pm, and there'll be some serious bargains, some proceeds of which will
go to the block association.  Volunteer referees will be on hand for any
UC-list-generated fisticuffs.  Of course, if you really want to get your
tithe on, I have it on good authority that the Latter Day Saints will be
having an event all day in Malcolm X Park. So once you've snapped up some
goodies at the Osage porch sale, you can make your way over to the park to
ensure that Amy Gutman hasn't indentured a couple of wayward students into
tacking a Mitt Romney poster to every tree in the place.

Once again: Block-wide porch sale in the 5000 Block of Osage Ave. Saturday
June 9th from 9am to 3pm.

See you there!  Andrew











































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

S. Sharrieff Ali wrote:

The motion carried and was without opposition to have a community
meeting organized by
"concerned community residents". I made the motion and volunteered to
make sure the meeting
happened. 20 people signed to participate in a committee to organize the
meeting.
... 
The idea was not to rely on the UCD or Penn to organize a meeting.

...
The UC-Review has volunteered to moderate the community meeting with a
suggested location of 
Rosenberger Hall. It would be wise for representatives of the Board of
UCD to participate as well as the 
trustees committees of the institutions represented. 



sharrieff,

here's an initial contribution to the proposed community 
meeting, developed openly here onlist [and still open to 
revision].


a set of responsibilities for us and ucd:

- - - - - - - - - - -

1: ucd is primarily accountable to us, the public,
   not to ucd

- - - - - - - - - - -

2: ucd's performance/actions should be
   evaluated/investigated/monitored on an ongoing basis
   by an agency independent of ucd

- - - - - - - - - - -

3: we should develop the means whereby ucd
   communications are public, timely and proactive

- - - - - - - - - - -

4: ucd's boundaries should be clearly defined and
   maintained

- - - - - - - - - - -

5: ucd should remain scrupulously neutral in public
   questions/disputes/contests, not taking sides or
   even appearing to take sides.

- - - - - - - - - - -

6: ucd officers/staff should not serve on the
   boards of neighborhood organizations.

- - - - - - - - - - -

7: regular public forums should be held to generate a
   set of principles, best practices, etc. that would
   examine and improve ucd as a public service
   organization.

- - - - - - - - - - -

8. ucd should use its resources to facilitate/broker
   compromise among competing neighborhood stakeholders
   rather than using resources to implement solutions
   for one type of stakeholder. ie, win/win not win/lose
   [example: ucd brokers Trees/HelpWithPropertyTaxes
   rather than takes sides in Trees/NoTrees on kyle's
   block. ucd becomes uniquely positioned as an agent
   for equality rather than an agent for divisiveness.]

- - - - - - - - - - -





..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
  "It is very clear on this listserve who
   these people are. Ray has admitted being
   connected to this forger."  -- Tony West














































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Anthony West wrote:

Let us frame it as a true dichotomy instead.




why even insist on a dichotomy? I've just finished reading a 
bunch of posts by various people on this list who have come 
up with a variety of responses about 'where to go from 
here,' and it sure doesn't look like options need to be 
mutually exclusive.


here's what I've got so far, a quick scrape from posts made 
on the list since the morning's announcement:


- - - - - - - -

Community members raised three motions, all of which passed 
with scarcely a dissenting voice.


(glenn:) We, at the first Thursday meeting, insist that UCD 
make full disclosures of policies and processes to 
facilitate transparency and accountability appropriate for a 
special services district.


Freda made the motion to retain John Fenton.

Sharrieff made the motion to facilitate a community forum 
about this issue so that the community might ask all 
questions directly to UCD.


The UC-Review has volunteered to moderate the community 
meeting with a suggested location of Rosenberger Hall. It 
would be wise for representatives of the Board of UCD to 
participate as well as the trustees committees of the 
institutions represented. 20 people signed to participate in 
a committee to organize the meeting.


I certainly hope that stakeholders in the UCD, both 
institutional and individual will attend and that there can 
be some productive feedback.


If the major share holders of a special service district 
really want community engagement, in the future; we must be 
included in honest and transparent processes and the 
organization must have accountable and competent leadership.


So, UCD: what's wrong with agreeing that Fenton had made a 
mistake, and letting him get back to his excellent work a 
bit wiser?


How do we thank John Fenton? Can his job and reputation be 
saved? Should we save his job? lose UCD? settle for what we 
get (and thus deserve)?


How do we prevent the further co opting of UC by Politics, Penn?

Do we support any person or initiative at UCD?

I think the shareholders and we resident stakeholders would 
be better served if they got rid of the existing Board and 
Executive staff and rehired John to focus on the street 
cleaning.


One possible outcome could be, hypothetically, for all 
parties who can't imagine life without John Fenton to create 
a corporation, the University City Clean-n-Safe Co., and to 
pool the money they would otherwise have given to UCD into 
this new organization.


http://www.uta.edu/faculty/mputnam/SPCH3309/Notes/EthicalTheories.html
a link to an interesting piece from the University of Texas 
on corporate ethics and corporate governance. Much of it is 
relevant to the issue current in UC on UCD


The problem now is who really coordinates the UCD and to 
whom is it answerable.



- - - - - - - - -



UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
  "It is very clear on this listserve who
   these people are. Ray has admitted being
   connected to this forger."  -- Tony West




















































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[Dan Widyono]

> So as a BID, UCD reports first and foremost to its backers.

It seems to me (perhaps naively) that if people want any kind of control over
a BID, then, they ought to establish relationships with the backers and
figure out how to convince the backers that their needs and concerns are in
alignment.

Better relationships between community and businesses in the community is
never a bad thing.  And the community will end up getting more out of the
business-backed organizations like UCD.

Or must it not be that simple?

Dan W.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Liz asks great questions: where do we go from here?

[MLamond]

In a message dated 6/7/07 8:23:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> What I'm trying to understand about the investigation is, to be blunt,
> what's taking so long? 
> 
Matthew, we know UCD has had time to ASK all the parties, but we don't know 
what, if any, answers were received.  Or if the answers led to more questions, 
or the questioning of additional parties. Or if the actions or inactions of 
any of the involved parties are making closure difficult.  (What, for example, 
did Tom Knox say?)

Didn't "Scooter" Libby just get convicted of lying to a grand jury?  An 
investigation isn't always a piece of cake.

Yesterday's Inquirer editorial:
Editorial - the Libby Sentence

Thirty months in prison sounds just about right for Vice President Cheney's 
former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who was sentenced yesterday.

Libby's lying to the FBI and to a grand jury was serious, both for the 
deception itself and for what he was trying to hide. By giving false testimony, 
Libby attempted to cover up the Bush administration's reckless scheme to 
discredit 
a critic of the Iraq invasion, former ambassador Joseph Wilson

In their zeal to damage Wilson's credibility, Libby and others in the 
administration revealed to journalists that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, 
worked 
for the CIA. The suggestion was that Wilson's trip to Niger was not a serious 
fact-finding mission but a junket courtesy of nepotism in the CIA.

Libby's defenders have been fond of claiming that Plame was not an undercover 
agent, and therefore the case against Libby is meaningless. But the CIA 
verified 10 days after Libby's guilty verdict that Plame was indeed a covert 
agent 
at the time that Bush and Cheney's inner circle outed her. Either they didn't 
know or didn't care. Political expediency trumped national security.

There are persistent calls for Bush to pardon Libby. That would be as 
arrogant and improper as the original scheme. While Libby was undoubtedly 
following 
orders, his culpability remains. He lied to federal agents investigating one of 
the most reckless and potentially dangerous political hit jobs in years.






Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101


**
 See what's free 
at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Piranha - Hang'em High, Liberal

[Craigsolve]

 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 10:31:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Scooter  deserved prison for doing the wrong thing.


Reminding myself you were a fine bankruptcy attorney, I am stunned by your  
excursion on list into federal corruption opinion.
 
Libby is entitled to an appeal process that may very well exonerate  him.
 
Libby says he forgot issues of time and content.
 
Was any disclosure law really violated? Without such, there was no crime;  
Plame was not a covert operative. Additionally, was Plame forgetful or a liar,  
since she now is on record having related three different versions of how  her 
husband received consideration for the Niger assignment. Maybe she should be  
prosecuted for lying to Congress or before a Federal Grand Jury.
 
Interestingly, loose lipped Armitage had previously been represented pro  
bono by Libby in a particularly expensive defense. Let no good turn go  
unpunished.
 
There is no comparison between Libby and Fenton unless there exists within  
UCD codified operating procedures explicitly addressing the issues of the  
extension of services to political gatherings.
 
The only similarity between these two men is they both were screwed by  
REMFs. Rank has its privileges, sometimes undeserved.
 
Substitute the local soon hoped to be NID for the below organization to see  
had responsibility can be misplaced
 
Ciao,
 
Craig
 
SPANGDAHLEM AIR BASE, Germany - A Spangdahlem-based  airman was sentenced 
Monday to four months confinement for her part in a sexual  act with two other 
airmen.  
Airman 1st Class Ashley N. Rains pleaded guilty at a  court-martial to two 
indecent acts charges.  
She had faced rape and sodomy charges but admitted to the  lesser charges as 
part of a plea deal. 
Judge (Col.) Gordon Hammock also sentenced Rains, 22, an  aircrew life 
support specialist with the 22nd Fighter Squadron, to reduction to  the lowest 
pay 
grade.  
She faced a maximum sentence that included as many as 10  years in a military 
prison, but Air Force prosecutors argued for a lighter  sentence of two 
years. 
The alcohol-induced menage a trois on Sept. 24 in Bitburg  included a male 
airman and a female staff sergeant.  
But both prosecution and defense lawyers debated whether  it was consensual 
among the three.  
Rains and Airman Christopher D. Hicks are the only airmen  charged in the 
incident because the Air Force lawyers said the staff sergeant  was too drunk 
to 
give consent. 
Air Force prosecutor Capt. Mike Felsen said the staff  sergeant “appeared 
drunk” and slipped “in and out of consciousness” while Rains  and Hicks 
performed sexual acts with her. 
Felsen argued the staff sergeant, who did not testify  during the trial, was 
vulnerable and Rains and Hicks took advantage of her.  
But Rains’ defense attorney, Capt. Matthew King, called  the incident a 
situation involving three consenting adults with “various degrees  of 
intoxication.”
 
King argued that Rains shouldn’t go to jail for what  amounts to a drunken 
threesome. 
“Does she really have to go to jail for this?” he  asked. 
The Air Force had charged Rains with rape and sodomy, but  prosecutors could 
not prove the more serious charges, King added, therefore, the  question of 
consent isn’t relevant in Rains’ case. 
Rains said she was embarrassed by the episode. 
“I’ve learned from this mistake,” she said during a  statement she read at 
the trial. 
Hicks faces more serious charges.  
The airman, who is assigned to the 52nd Civil Engineer  Squadron, has been 
charged with rape and sodomy and will face a court-martial at  Spangdahlem Air 
Base on May 30. 
Sound Off...What do you think? _Join the discussion._ 
(http://forums.military.com/1/OpenTopic?q=Y&a=dl&s=78919038&f=672198221&x_id=136750&x_subject=Female
 
Airman Punished for 
Threesome&x_dpp=Y&x_link=http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,136750,00.html)
 

Copyright 2007 Stars and  Stripes.




** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Reality check

[Anthony West]

That's right. That's normal. And that's standard.

Which is not to say I like it. But that's standard operating procedure for 
management dismissals and suspension in corporate America these days. There's 
something close to a manual for it. The manager who doesn't follow the manual 
can be accused of malfeasance, as can his employer. This is not a manual I 
would ever have written; but there it is.

It's one thing to bash UCD for things it might have done differently. But to 
bash it for steps it was virtually compelled to take ... that strikes me as 
unfair and stupid.

If you think it could have easily have done differently, cite a case in your 
experience where an employer, faced with a similarly explosive employee 
investigation, handled it better in your opinion. If you have no real-world 
knowledge how an agency has handled this differently, just say so. The time for 
bluster and baloney is over. Don't fake knowledge when a real man's livelihood 
is at stake.

-- Tony West

  Melani is trying to assert that those of us whom have been critical of UCD 
caused the harm to John Fenton while UCD is blameless.  Folks, the reports we 
heard today suggest that John was barred almost immediately. 

[UC] the power of anonymity

[Anthony West]

Today's flap provides, among other things, a useful test of the drawing 
power of anonymous postings.


Attendance at today's First Thursday meeting was normal. My god, did we 
enjoy an unexpected show! But at least we all fit in the room.


Of the 70-odd attendees, at least 90% were familiar, organization-affiliated 
attendees. A half dozen at most could be said to have been drawn by the 
publicity.


Another fact of note: the individuals who voted against UCD's interests with 
near unanimity were leaders of the civic associations of West Philadelphia. 
For years now we have been reading furious posts by a small number of 
UC-list subscribers that all civic groups around here are helpless lackeys 
of Penn and its supposed dragon UCD. Without exception, these posters had no 
meaningful experience in civic groups and no record of competency in these 
issues. Yet they love to heap nonsensical slurs on their neighbors, merely 
because their neighbors belong to civic groups.


Today, the civic groups of West Philadelphia spoke out, spontaneously and 
with one voice. They are quite diverse in terms of interest and class and 
ethnicity. So the amazing thing was how much they agreed on this issue.


I think they also agree they don't need the second-guessing of inexperienced 
wankers to speak for our community. These activists are the folks who have 
been in the trenches; they know what they're talking about and they know who 
has walked the walk.


-- Tony West



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] Reality check

[Glenn]

Melani is trying to assert that those of us whom have been critical of UCD 
caused the harm to John Fenton while UCD is blameless.  Folks, the reports we 
heard today suggest that John was barred almost immediately.  So while some 
folks were waiting for this "internal investigation" and John's 2 week 
suspension to end, UCD knew immediately that Levy was going to fire him.  It's 
very clear Councilwoman Blackwell tried to save his job and while Melani makes 
a fool of herself she assails her as well

Melani's claims are stupid and mean.  The people who have been critical of UCD, 
like me, have been the most vocal critics of making a scapegoat of Mr. Fenton 
and now we learn he's fired with a gag order too!  Obviously, Mr. Fenton was 
forced out, back before we first started asking questions.

It was always mean to try to silence the people's questions claiming that we 
were the ones hurting Mr. Fenton.  Now we have clear indications of how asanine 
those claims have been.  Had we stood up to UCD's lack of accountability in the 
past, that might have prevented this.  Anyone who did try always had to face 
these mean spirited attacks from Melani and the others.

[UC] Piranha

[pmuyehara]

 Whoa!? I'm so glad it's been a very busy week at work, the better not to 
get sucked into this list volume.? What a frenzy!
? I don't know John (so far as I recall) but respect his seeming universal 
support, even if his supporters seek to use the situation for different 
purposes.? 
 I encourage folks to be thoughtful and to avoid jumping to conclusions 
about what wrongs may have been committed, who did them, and what remedy is 
appropriate when about all we seem to know is what the paper said and what 
people reported Jannie to have said (and of course a lot of history of this org 
and that person).
??? Lots of people talked of a man who had sacrificed so much for public 
service, was loyal, worked hard, was smart, got lots done, etc., and that 
should count something off his prison sentence.? The judge seemed to think that 
since he was a public servant, Scooter deserved prison for doing the wrong 
thing.? I'm not saying the cases are the same, but that people who make 
mistakes can be good too, so being good doesn't mean you did no wrong.
??? Having said that, if I were UCD, I'd have to pause about the seeming 
unanimity of support for this guy, even from those who condemn him for possibly 
having engaged in partisan activity.

Paul


AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

[UC] Upcoming Parish Porch Sale

[frbyers]

Hi, All,

 It's almost here - the 29th annual St. Francis de Sales Parish Porch Sale 
- in the school auditorium at 47th & Windsor Ave. on Saturday, June 9 from 10-3 
and Sunday, June 10 from 10-1.  Bargains galore at wonderful prices - toys, 
books, gifts, kitchen items, craft items, housewares and much, much more.  Stay 
for a delicious lunch.

 See you there.
   Fran

AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

[UC] Spinning out of control

[pmuyehara]

 My dear Reyom,
    I would be very surprised if I suggested that blabbermouths be removed from 
the list.  I would likely have suggested that they be subject to social 
controls, that landing on the former top 10 lists should  be an occasion for 
introspection.  But, as one of my clients used to tell me, "quote me if I'm 
wrong."  
    Be that as it may, this was an unusually fine post from Nnelg.

Mr. Paul


 


 

-Original Message-
From: Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Sent: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:51 pm
Subject: Re: [UC] Spinning out of control, was: Debunking the hysteria 


















Pmuyehara,


 


Sorry buddy. Please don't be mad at 
me.  


 


 I think I got confused about your name back 
when you never signed your messages.  I thought, who is this guy always 
taking pot shots at me becuse of my criticism of FOCP?  I didn't even know 
your name when you suggested that people like me should be kicked off the 
listserv.


 


I can't remember if I thanked you when you answered 
me and signed the name "Paul"  Thank you Pmuyehara. I do really need to 
work on my spelling.


 


Your buddy,


Reyom Nnelg


PS:  My new name sounds like a name 
for a barbarian warrior.  Where is my battle ax!




  
- Original Message - 

  
From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

  
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com 

  
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 10:28 
  PM

  
Subject: [UC] Spinning out of control, 
  was: Debunking the hysteria 

  



  
    Where's the e-mirror when you need 
  it?
 I have recently learned that no matter what I 
  say to this person, he will 1) misspell my screen name, 2) 
  disagree with what I say, 3) attack me personally rather than engage on  
  the merits,  4)   accuse me of conspiring with others, 
  profess to know my intentions, plans and favorite color; 
  and 5) more than likely be uncivil.  
 I 
  suppose it is tilting at windmills to try again to explain that lashing out 
  personally and viciously at all who disagree may serve to silence them, but 
it 
  does not win them over.  Even if it is true, he is consciously, or so he 
  says, being nasty as a tactic that he believes will turn the tide of 
  disagreement back.  Despite all evidence to the contrary, suggesting it 
  just undermines his credibility and covers up any significant issues he seeks 
  to highlight, drawing attention instead to  his ugly 
  discourse.
 Have you ever heard a true proponent of 
  free speech criticizing people for engaging in disagreement?  First 
  amendment believers see the remedy to disagreeable and ugly positions in more 
  discussion and disagreement.  
    If you favor 
  civility, be civil.  If you like name calling, call names.  Just 
  stop complaining about free speech, disagreement, name calling and bullying 
  when your comments are unbounded.  
    Where is that 
  darn e-mirror?

   NNELG


  



  


-Original Message-
From: Glenn 
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Andy Frishkoff 
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
  UnivCity@list.purple.com
Sent: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 4:43 pm
Subject: Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people


  

  
Andy,

  
 

  
Your making some criticisms of me, so I'd like to 
  respond.  You probably don't remember my early posts nor the many names I 
  was called by those who receive harsh treatment from me.  I remember them 
  quite vividly.

  
 

  
I would love to stop peppering my posts with 
  anger.  Unfortunately, they may have been necessary to help spark the 
  recent discussion of civility.

  
 

  
Whether it's the fallacious 
  argumentative strategies, the type of character attack just attempted at 
  me, or starting the name calling; it's destructive and 
  can't be seen as productive.  

  
 

  
What strategy should one take against the 
  bullying which is meant to silence dissent?  I hate being ganged up upon 
  and I hate having to show anger publicly to help demonstrate how hurtful this 
  ganging--up with trickery can be.

  
 

  
The issues I stress are very 
  important.  If I was not receiving so much of this stuff aimed at 
  me, others that wish to speak up would be receiving this battery. And in 
  addition to hurting them personally, the bullies might get their wish and 
  force someone to shut-up to stop receiving the attacks.  That is the 
  intent of the bullying and ganging.

  
 

  
No one that doesn't deserve harsh treatment will 
  get it from me.  No one needs to fear harsh treatment from me if they 
  don't get involved with the ganging-up or trickery.  How do people react 
  when they see how I have been treated when I express my 
  views about very serious issues?  That is what individuals who are 
  intimidated to post things need to be fearful about not because of me or 
  my return of insults.

  
 

  
If we can figure out a way to stop the 
  trickery meant to silence dissent and the ganging up with a "free 
  pass,"  I promise

Re: [UC] Liz asks great questions: where do we go from here?

[Glenn]

"Glenn Moyer, who has made it clear on the list that he doesn't have any 
respect for any of our community institutions, is also enjoying the current 
mess."  


Melani, I don't have any respect for you.  

How dare you claim to know my feelings?  Your posts are complete idiocy.  So I 
want to be rid of Penn too?  Keep on making a fool of yourself. Why don't you 
try an idiotic off line survey?  You're pathetic.

 I hope someone does sue you.  
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 6:39 PM
  Subject: [UC] Liz asks great questions: where do we go from here?


  In a message dated 6/7/2007 5:46:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] writes:
  My questions include:
How do we thank John Fenton?
Can his job and reputation be saved?
Should we 
save his job? 
lose UCD? 
settle for what we get (and thus deserve)?
How do we prevent the further co opting of UC by Politics, Penn and 
powerful lurkers?
Do we support any person or initiative at UCD?
?, ?, ?
  I totally agree with everything Liz asks here. We don't know the details - 
only John Fenton knows EVERYTHING - so we can't judge what happened.  But, 
where do we go NEXT?

  Didn't this problem come about because the Councilwoman asked John Fenton to 
help out with SOMETHING, and he did?  She doesn't dispute that that's what 
happened - the only question is what did she ask him to help out with.  And 
then, didn't some student tell the Daily News that John did something which was 
inconsistent with the tax status of his employer and the law?  Isn't that how 
the story came out?  From that start, how did anyone jump to the conclusion 
that "UCD" is to blame?  It seems to me that the parties who participated were 
Jannie Blackwell, John Fenton, the student, the Daily News, and perhaps Tom 
Knox.

  Faced with this accusation from the student, wouldn't any responsible 
employer have no choice but to launch a thorough investigation?  And wouldn't 
they have to keep things private till they got to the bottom of it?  Don't 
those of you calling for immediate answers understand that an employer has to 
protect his employees' rights?  Would any of you want your employers updating 
the public about what you might or might not have done wrong, before your 
company had all of the facts?  Do you think John Fenton wants that?  The daily 
gossip sheet sent out by his coworkers?  Are you considering the liability 
issues here, while you are demanding that the UCD give updates to the public?

  Al Krigman has already told the list how delighted he is to be able to use 
this incident - caused by Councilwoman Blackwell, John Fenton, the student, the 
Daily News and perhaps Tom Knox - to rally people against the UCD so he can try 
once again to kill the proposal where landlords would pay a small share of the 
cost of UCD's work.  Well, a good portion of the money the landlords would pay 
under the Business Improvement District initiative would be to EXPAND THE CLEAN 
AND SAFE EFFORTS John Fenton has been heading.  So list members, help Al out 
here, and if John has a job, it will be limited - in scope, and perhaps in 
time, too.  How long do you think the institutions will continue to pay the 
wages of John and his coworkers, if the community wants the services, but 
bedevils the institutions for funding it?

  Glenn Moyer, who has made it clear on the list that he doesn't have any 
respect for any of our community institutions, is also enjoying the current 
mess.  Does anyone on this list doubt that Glenn would like to be rid of 
Friends of Clark Park, the UCD, Penn, and every other organized entity involved 
in our neighborhood?  Well, if Glenn helps Al rid UC of the UCD, then clearly 
John Fenton won't have a job, right?  And there will be no organization to help 
out Karen and Wendy when the street person strikes, no one to get the Water 
Dept. to replace the disappeared manhole covers pronto, no one..

  So please, re-read Liz's questions and think about ways to get to a positive 
outcome appropriate for the current situation - NOT based on the libertarian 
politics of a frugal landlord, or the exaggerations of an anti-establishment 
rabble-rouser, NOT based on behind-the-scenes "payback" for old grudges, but 
based on "what happens next?"

  It's hard to think of a way to turn this to a win/win situation, but perhaps 
we can at least avoid having it be lose/lose.  

  Melani Lamond

  Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
  Urban & Bye, Realtor
  3529 Lancaster Ave.
  Philadelphia, PA 19104
  cell phone 215-356-7266
  office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
  office fax 215-222-1101





--
  See what's free at AOL.com. 


---

[UC] Re: FRAUDULENT POST

[Anthony West]

Your track record and your M.O. are well known by now in this community, 
Glenn.


-- Tony West

- Original Message - 
From: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nevertheless, Mr. West is at the center of these occurences each time.  I 
find that very interesting!




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Glenn]

- Original Message - 
From: "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "University City List" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an 
update on the UCD investigation)




Glenn,

Framing someone is always nasty, but it is not intrinsically "arrogant". 
The word means something else. But enough copy-editing. On to the real 
facts ... the "timeline", as Ray is so fond of talking about.


Committeeman7, who appears to be responding to an email of yours somewhere 
down the line, posted his lie on UC-list at 9:12 am, inviting everybody to 
come to First Thursday and "bring their neighbors".


At 9:40 am, you, Glenn Moyer, enthusiastically responded and told all 
UC-list you intended to show up at First Thursday to demand an amplified 
list of explanations for this and that, from so-and-so and such-and-such.


If committeeman7 were *not* connected with you, the most that could be 
said is he knew you are a sucker for hostile public meeting opportunities. 
You have a track record of organizing throngs of people to show up at 
meetings so you can harangue various people you believe are engaged in a 
gigantic conspiracy against you and all we hold dear. So you jumped on 
this chance.


Even in that case -- and that's the kindest possible interpretation of the 
evidence in this event -- nobody else framed you, Glenn. You framed 
yourself. You yourself published what you intended to do with this false 
post. I don't know whether you knew it was false at the time or not. But I 
know what you intended to do with that false information, because you told 
all of us.


-- Tony West



Again Mr. West is accusing and insinuating that I had something to do with 
the committeman 7.  He is asserting that I have some evil and false 
intentions as he does quite regularly.


Fact:  Mr. West was the first one to immediately claim to discover the fraud 
of committeeman 7 and voteforandytoy.   The almost immediate:  FRAUD WARNING 
was the same in both cases.  In fact, this time only 7 hours passed from the 
committeeman 7 post until Mr. West's investigation was completed and posted 
on the list.


Fact: Mr West immediately launched an investigation and decided to contact 
the supposed victims.


Fact:  Mr. West immediately started offering conclusions about the likely 
perps.  It was the "listserv politics" and anti UCD people with 
voteforandytoy.  This time he repeatedly has insinuated that Ray and I were 
involved.


Fact:  Mr. West has out of control arrogance.  He said this of the 
propagandist:


Really, Glenn? I wouldn't describe committeeman7's style as "arrogant" in 
any way. Quite the contrary, it's plain and light. Very cleverly written, 
I think. It sounds natural and everyday. An artful trick.




Fact: Mr. West and others insinuate that this anonymous post was somehow 
done by a Blackwell supporter.  Absurdity, just like the absurdity of 
blaming the Toy pre-election post on UCD dissenters.


Fact Mr. West is an attendee of this meeting.  There is a relatively small 
group of people both on the list and so interested in this meeting .


Mr. West has made it clear that he will go to great lengths to assault his 
opponents character.  This is quite a trail of interesting occurences.  I 
know some folks believe that I should continue to allow Mr. West to make the 
kind of accusations in his above post yet not bring up this amazing series 
of occurences.


Nevertheless, Mr. West is at the center of these occurences each time.  I 
find that very interesting!











Glenn wrote:
Let me explain the arrogance of the poster.  The poster was trying to 
frame me.




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.9/834 - Release Date: 6/5/2007 2:38 PM






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[Craigsolve]

 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 8:24:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

UCD  reports first and foremost to its backers. While it 
earnestly hopes to  please the whole community in the process, its underlying 
line of  accountability is to the commerce that drives its community. If 
other  aspects of community life want to have an institution in which their  
concerns are the drivers, they must create an agency whose mission  addresses 
those concerns. The Fire Dept. doesn't catch criminals,  the Police don't 
fill potholes and Streets doesn't put out  fires.



And, they all report to the Managing Director's Office, which coordinates  
all of those actions, and the MDO is answerable to an elected CEO - our  mayor.
 
The problem now is who really coordinates the UCD and to whom is it  
answerable.
 
Ciao,
 
Craig



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Not Offlist - Re: [UC] Offlist -- Be careful or I'll start looking into a libel

[Craigsolve]

 
Melani: 
 
I'm responding to you in a collegial manner; there has been too much  acr
imony and disappointment on the list this week.
 
Thus, let me make a few caring suggestions:
 
 
1) If the communication isn't Offlist, don't include the word in the title,  
since it creates an inaccurate impression. Imagine how other people on the 
list  may have initially interpreted your post as a threat rather than a  
question.

 
2) Turn your Sig Line on and off as appropriate for your  communication, if 
for no other reason than to protect the good name of your  Broker of Record.
 
Your accompanying post does not seem to render any kind of information or  
opinion about the practice of real estate as regulated by the  Commission, 
while 
it suggests you may be named the defendant in a legal  action.
 
When you needlessly include Urban & Bye Realtor's name, you may  risk 
besmirching your employer's valuable name, raise questions about his  oversight 
of 
your employment, the presence and nature of his  employer/employee corporate 
oversight policies, and may force him to  evaluate the nature and/or need for 
the 
implementation of a corporate  policy regarding the transmittal and storage 
of email communications that  include his name and via whose email servers.
 
3) Just like in real estate, in law you get that for which you pay. Saying  I 
am sorry to someone, who you inappropriately accused of dishonesty might be  
hard but it is the courageous and appropriate path to doing the right thing 
and  can salve wounds a lot more efficiently than paying a defense attorney 
$350 
per  hour for consults.
 
On several occasions attorneys representing my wife told her, "guys like me  
always have money hidden away; its just a matter of finding it." You are a 
very  public success in real estate, with a somewhat acerbic manner. You make 
yourself  a great target for a wounded protagonist and an aggressive 
Philadelphia 
 Attorney.
 
Best wishes,
 
Craig
 
 
 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 7:34:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

A person with whom I don't communicate offlist has sent me  the following 
email, with the subject line shown above.  Perhaps the  attorneys on the list 
can 
let me know if I've libeled anyone in the quoted  section which I wrote.  The 
person's response follows the quote of my  writing:

<< In a message dated 6/7/2007 6:41:12 PM Eastern  Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:



Al Krigman has already told the list how  delighted he is to be able to use 
this incident - caused  by Councilwoman Blackwell, John Fenton, the student, 
the Daily News and  perhaps Tom Knox - to rally people against the UCD so he 
can 
try  once again to kill the proposal where landlords would pay a  small share 
of the cost of UCD's work.  Well, a good portion of the  money the landlords 
would pay under the Business Improvement District  initiative would be to 
EXPAND THE CLEAN AND SAFE EFFORTS John  Fenton has been heading.  So list 
members, 
help Al out here, and if  John has a job, it will be limited - in scope, and 
perhaps in time,  too.  How long do you think the institutions will continue 
to  pay the wages of John and his coworkers, if the community wants  the 
services, but bedevils the institutions for funding  it?




Be careful or I'll start looking into a libel suit. I'm  getting a bit weary 
of your shit.>>

- Melani  Lamond

Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext.  113
office fax 215-222-1101



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[Anthony West]

Um ... not really. And you shouldn't feel like you missed something obvious, 
Wilma. It's not obvious at all. First off, I'll bet not one in 10 of 
University City's 50,000 residents has even heard of "University City 
District." Of that 5,000, I'd be amazed if one in 10 understands what UCD 
"is", in a technical sense. It's a Business Improvement District (BID). This 
obscure variety of public-private non-profit interface is completely lawful 
and has a professional world of its own.


To succeed, any BID needs to work well with existing political forces. But 
its core mission is commercial, not political (or social service or 
governmental). Its objective is to facilitate a community environment in 
which businesses that depend on that community's wellbeing can thrive.


So as a BID, UCD reports first and foremost to its backers. While it 
earnestly hopes to please the whole community in the process, its underlying 
line of accountability is to the commerce that drives its community. If 
other aspects of community life want to have an institution in which their 
concerns are the drivers, they must create an agency whose mission addresses 
those concerns. The Fire Dept. doesn't catch criminals, the Police don't 
fill potholes and Streets doesn't put out fires.


-- Tony West


Forgive me and I am not trying to cute or funny, but I always thought the
UCD was an organization created politically and engaged in community
politics from its inception.

-Wilma




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Liz asks great questions: where do we go from here?

[Matthew Snyder]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Faced with this accusation from the student, wouldn't any responsible
employer have no choice but to launch a thorough investigation?  And
wouldn't they have to keep things private till they got to the bottom of it?
 Don't those of you calling for immediate answers understand that an
employer has to protect his employees' rights?


What I'm trying to understand about the investigation is, to be blunt,
what's taking so long?  It's not as though UCD is investigating an
international money laundering ring, or whether string theory really
does reconcile different schools of physics.  They're trying to figure
out whether campaign signs were put up at a rally, and if so, who
requested them, and who put them up.  I think that's part of the
frustration that some people are expressing.  What does another week
teach you about the incident that you didn't know a week ago?  Clearly
at this point they have interviewed the key players and have
(probably) competing views of what happened.  Now what?

Moving on...

One possible outcome could be, hypothetically, for all parties who
can't imagine life without John Fenton to create a corporation, the
University City Clean-n-Safe Co., and to pool the money they would
otherwise have given to UCD into this new organization.   The new
company would give Fenton a handsome raise and hire him a small crew.
My impression is that John Fenton is singlehandedly more valuable to
the neighborhood than is the rest of UCD combined, in terms of
concrete action and an accumulated network of connections.  I can even
imagine people who would not want to donate to UCD being persuaded to
donate to UCC-n-S.

Just my opinion, I'm not trying to hate on UCD here.

Regards,
Matthew

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[Wilma de Soto]

I quite agree, but the money in charge is so much more than you or I can
imagine.

They wish nothing to damage their reputation and risk any bad financial
impact

John Fenton was a fine man, however in the larger scheme of things, it was
much easier, politically expedient and perhaps cost-efficient to sacrifice
John despite what the community preferred.

Morally, it's a crime.  Legally, it's politics.

And so it goes...AGAIN! :)


On 6/7/07 5:13 PM, "S. Sharrieff Ali" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> So, UCD: what's wrong with agreeing that he'd made a mistake, and
> letting him get back to his excellent work a bit wiser?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Siano
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 4:50 PM
> Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
> Subject: Re: [UC] which bad thing?
> 
> I don't think we've learned anything substantial beyond the loss of John
> 
> Fenton.
> 
> When the news broke, there were any number of accounts, and any number
> of theories. In the first place, _did _Fenton have his crew do anything
> for the Knox campaign that day? I've heard tales that the kid who'd
> _claimed_ this had rescinded his claim, and Jannie Blackwell called it a
> 
> lie, but I ain't heard any solid answers on this.
> 
> And _if_ it happened, then why? Well, it doesn't seem likely that Fenton
> 
> or UCD are closet Knox supporters, and I recall Lewis Wendell getting
> flak for something involving Michael Nutter a few months back. It seems
> far _more_ plausible, to me, that someone under Knox or Blackwell
> might've asked John for some effort, and John may have agreed merely to
> be a decent guy. After all, it was a community event... and nobody who
> wants good relations with the community wants to piss off the local City
> 
> Councilperson. If _that_ was the case, then both Fenton and UCD were put
> 
> in a bad position. (I am not surprised that the people complaining about
> 
> UCD haven't pursued this alternate theory.)
> 
> If this did come down to an error in judgment on John's part... then
> firing him is a severe black mark against UCD. The guy does a great job.
> 
> He's probably the one asset UCD has that's universally praised around
> here. (And yes, I suspect many UCD 'critics' are privately ecstatic that
> 
> Fenton's gone; makes their hobby even easier.) So, UCD: what's wrong
> with agreeing that he'd made a mistake, and letting him get back to his
> excellent work a bit wiser?
> 
> So UCD followed institutional procedure; whether or not Fenton did
> anything wrong, it _could_ become a problem for UCD, so Fenton had to
> go. It's safer that way. But it makes UCD look pretty bad. We like to
> think of a community as something that's a bit more, well,
> understanding. Look at the petition that waas organzied in support of
> John Fenton. Decent community managers would have considered that, or
> addressed it. Who wants a community managed like a corporate culture?
> 
> (Of course, all of the above is _moot_ if it turned out that Fenton
> really _did_ abuse his authority to support Knox, screaming "Yes! I did
> it! I loved doing it! And I'd do it again! Muhahahaha!" at his
> interrogators during the investigation.)
> 
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
> .



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[Wilma de Soto]

"Those who would fault UCD for potentially engaging in political
activity, thereby running afoul of its 501 requirements, necessarily
require an internal investigation that is both thorough and discreet."

-Anthony West


Forgive me and I am not trying to cute or funny, but I always thought the
UCD was an organization created politically and engaged in community
politics from its inception.

Mind you, not to disregard all small-time "neighborhood/community"
associations who engage in the same behavior.

The difference is that community/neighborhood associations have members that
serve the behest of said association, while at the same time hone their view
of how the area should development, (Often against the community and for
their own interests) and work with those who share their vision and have
deep pockets.

If that is not politics, I don't know what is.

If the creation of the UCD was not a political move...well what was it then?


Just my opinion, not trying to win any arguments.

-Wilma






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: So, who is Committeeman? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Ross Bender]

On 6/7/07, Elizabeth F Campion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 Ross,

The only posts with inarguable intent to annoy were those who demand the
right to 'out' or badger C-7.

I still consider the original post and accurate and timely invitation to a
community meeting that was more lively than most.

Sorry,
your need to know
inability to let go
do not alter my original opinion or my interpretation of the regulation.

Let's agree to disagree.
I am beginning to find this thread boring and I am one of the
participants.




OK. I'll buy you a beer sometime.

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

[UC] Offlist -- Be careful or I'll start looking into a libel suit

[MLamond]

A person with whom I don't communicate offlist has sent me the following 
email, with the subject line shown above.   Perhaps the attorneys on the list 
can 
let me know if I've libeled anyone in the quoted section which I wrote.   The 
person's response follows the quote of my writing:

<< In a message dated 6/7/2007 6:41:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>  Al Krigman has already told the list how delighted he is to be able to use 
> this incident - caused by Councilwoman Blackwell, John Fenton, the student, 
> the Daily News and perhaps Tom Knox - to rally people against the UCD so he 
> can try once again to kill the proposal where landlords would pay a small 
> share of the cost of UCD's work.  Well, a good portion of the money the 
> landlords 
> would pay under the Business Improvement District initiative would be to 
> EXPAND THE CLEAN AND SAFE EFFORTS John Fenton has been heading.  So list 
> members, help Al out here, and if John has a job, it will be limited - in 
> scope, and 
> perhaps in time, too.  How long do you think the institutions will continue 
> to pay the wages of John and his coworkers, if the community wants the 
> services, but bedevils the institutions for funding it?
> 
> 
Be careful or I'll start looking into a libel suit. I'm getting a bit weary 
of your shit.>>



- Melani Lamond

Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101


**
 See what's free 
at http://www.aol.com.

RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[Bill Sanderson]

Thanks - I know about the petition, I signed it.  This sounds like a good
effort.  I certainly hope that stakeholders in the UCD, both institutional
and individual will attend and that there can be some productive feedback.
I'm a little worried that the legal folks are going to keep a lot from being
said, from the institutional side-but maybe Penn has somebody who will have
the guts to attend, and at least pass questions up the chain.

 

  _  

From: S. Sharrieff Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:57 PM
To: 'Bill Sanderson'; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

 

Bill:

 

The motion carried and was without opposition to have a community meeting
organized by

"concerned community residents". I made the motion and volunteered to make
sure the meeting

happened. 20 people signed to participate in a committee to organize the
meeting.

 

Glenn Bryan's "Penn" meeting was hijacked by a broader community issue
today, all other

agenda items took a back seat, particularly to the indictments of
Councilwoman Blackwell.

 

The idea was not to rely on the UCD or Penn to organize a meeting. It was
clear everyone 

in the room who was aware of the issue with John stood outraged by his
treatment, the lack of 

information prepared by UCD to release to the public, and the revelation of
John's "forced resignation" 

as we were told today. 

 

It was clear to me UCD has been advised by legal to say nothing besides the
very short statement 

released. Channel 6 WPVI News attended, filmed part of the meeting and took
statements from a few 

attendees.

 

Councilwoman Blackwell stated she viewed the situation with John as a
particular affront on her reputation 

for political reasons.

 

The UC-Review has volunteered to moderate the community meeting with a
suggested location of 

Rosenberger Hall. It would be wise for representatives of the Board of UCD
to participate as well as the 

trustees committees of the institutions represented. 

 

It is not about "Sharrieff Ali" putting a meeting together as an excuse not
to attend. Unanimously the 

"community" is behind the effort to get answers, the meeting is a part of
the process. As Tony mentioned, 

there was a petition of 300 signatures in support of John which had already
been forwarded to Councilwoman 

Blackwell's office.

 

I will post information as I get it. If anyone on the listserv would like to
join the committee, e-mail me

off-list.

 

S

 

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Bill Sanderson
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:20 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

 

Tony - one point of clarity:  You mention the meeting agreeing on three
points.  Was there any response from either Glenn Bryan or Lewis Wendell to
the idea of the forum organized by Sharrief Ali?   I would expect the first
two points to require further internal process, but I wonder if they were
able to agree to participate in the forum?

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 10:02 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

 

Two days after her office had said Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell had no
plans to update the community about the Fenton-Knox affair in Malcolm X Park
at the First Thursday meeting, she showed up promptly and did just that. She
went much farther, angrily baring a serious rift between Univesrsity City
District and her.

 

She delivered petitions with 300 signatures in support of Fenton. The room
at Walnut St. West Library, filled as usual with 70 people, most of them
representatives from more than three dozen agencies and organizations that
are active in West Philadelphia, noisily concurred and made forceful pleas
to retain the popular UCD employee in his job. There was universal agreement
Fenton has been a tireless supporter of the labors of all civic groups to
improve their community.

 

Blackwell charged Fenton was being offered resignation with a severance
package from UCD. She said she had asked to find ways to help underwrite his
work but had been rebuffed. She said she had suggested mediators for the
dispute but had been rebuffed.

 

UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell attended the meeting. He read a
previously published statement. Fenton, he reiterated, is still on paid
administrative leave pending the results of an internal investigation. In
addition, he said, "We are in discussions to resolve the matter."

 

Blackwell repeated her denial that she had involved Fenton or his community
service team with a political rally for Tom Knox in the park. "Everybody
knows I supported Tom Knox for Mayor," she said. "A couple of weeks before
the election, the other candidates began releasing their supporters to
support Michael Nutter. They didn't want Knox to win becaus

Re: So, who is Committeeman? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Elizabeth F Campion]

Ross,

The only posts with inarguable intent to annoy were those who demand the
right to 'out' or badger C-7. 

I still consider the original post and accurate and timely invitation to
a community meeting that was more lively than most.

Sorry,
your need to know
inability to let go
do not alter my original opinion or my interpretation of the regulation.

Let's agree to disagree.
I am beginning to find this thread boring and I am one of the
participants.

Liz   


On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 18:29:07 -0400 "Ross Bender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:



On 6/7/07, Elizabeth F Campion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Committeeman7 did nothing wrong!

He/she/it did something very wrong -- posted an anonymous message that
not only "annoyed" the listserve but caused a whole lot of trouble,
igniting a firefight and gangbang that resulted in a huge amount of
damage to the list. 

I'm not focusing on the anonymous posters' identity -- simply insisting
on the very basic principle that ANONYMOUS POSTING IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
PERIOD.

FWIW here is the text of the federal statute which became law in January
2006: 





It's illegal to annoy
A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you
must disclose your identity. Here's the relevant language. 
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate
telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted,
in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity
and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who
receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned
not more than two years, or both." 
http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance,+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491
.html

While you may believe, as the above commentator does, that it's a stupid
law is beside the point. There's a very good reason for this type of
statute, even if it's unlikely to be enforced. 


-- 
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org 


Elizabeth Campion   Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax,  Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
 www.PruFoxRoach.com

Re: [UC] Jannie Blackwell supports John Fenton, and so do I

[Anthony West]

Karen,

I hope I'm not leaping to conclusions, but by any chance are you referring 
to Chris Leswing, esteemed vice president of Friends of Clark Park? The 
connection with Brian Siano is suspicious. The timing of his release from 
prison would fit in with his sudden availability to run for office in a park 
support group. And the behavior sure sounds familiar.


-- Tony West

- Original Message - 
From: "Karen Heenan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Four years ago, not long before I met John Fenton, my house and I were 
assaulted by a homeless man named Chris who used to hang around 45th 
Street. Chris who would occasionally ring the doorbell, sometimes throw 
bottles at the porch, keep everyone on the street awake at night with his 
yelling, and once, memorably, smashed my plate glass front door with me 
standing right there behind it.


There were many people in the neighborhood who helped and supported me at 
that time, including the UCD ambassadors who showed up first, the police, 
and Brian Siano with a 1 a.m. emergency plywood delivery, but John Fenton 
was the man who went with me to court and had his ambassadors keep a 
lookout for Chris on my block when he was released from prison.

Karen Heenan
228 S. 45th Street




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Liz asks great questions: where do we go from here?

[Turner,Kathleen]

I fully agree that UCD has the right to protect their privacy and John Fenton's 
while they conduct their own internal investigation.
 
The person whose role in all of this really concerns me is Jannie Blackwell's.  
I know she has her strong supporters on this list, but I can't help feeling 
that she is being more than a bit disingenuous here (and I'm trying to be 
careful not to say "hypocritical").  There doesn't seem to be any question that 
it was at her request that UCD/John Fenton provided help with an "event" in 
Malcolm X Park.  
 
She is an experienced politician who was pretty heavily involved in the Knox 
campaign -- and she was not aware that the event was a political rally?  Or is 
it that she was unaware that a non-profit organization cannot be involved in a 
political campaign?
 
I would be far more impressed by her diatribe on John Fenton's behalf if she 
prefaced it with a few "mea culpa's".
 
If a community forum is suggested to question the internal decisions of UCD -- 
and I do agree that they've made a TERRIBLE mistake here -- I would like to see 
some accountability from Coucilwoman Blackwell.
 
Kathleen



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 6/7/2007 6:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Liz asks great questions: where do we go from here?


In a message dated 6/7/2007 5:46:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] writes:
My questions include:

How do we thank John Fenton?
Can his job and reputation be saved?
Should we 
save his job? 
lose UCD? 
settle for what we get (and thus deserve)?
How do we prevent the further co opting of UC by Politics, Penn 
and powerful lurkers?
Do we support any person or initiative at UCD?
?, ?, ?

I totally agree with everything Liz asks here. We don't know the details - only 
John Fenton knows EVERYTHING - so we can't judge what happened.  But, where do 
we go NEXT?
 
Didn't this problem come about because the Councilwoman asked John Fenton to 
help out with SOMETHING, and he did?  She doesn't dispute that that's what 
happened - the only question is what did she ask him to help out with.  And 
then, didn't some student tell the Daily News that John did something which was 
inconsistent with the tax status of his employer and the law?  Isn't that how 
the story came out?  From that start, how did anyone jump to the conclusion 
that "UCD" is to blame?  It seems to me that the parties who participated were 
Jannie Blackwell, John Fenton, the student, the Daily News, and perhaps Tom 
Knox.
 
Faced with this accusation from the student, wouldn't any responsible employer 
have no choice but to launch a thorough investigation?  And wouldn't they have 
to keep things private till they got to the bottom of it?  Don't those of you 
calling for immediate answers understand that an employer has to protect his 
employees' rights?  Would any of you want your employers updating the public 
about what you might or might not have done wrong, before your company had all 
of the facts?  Do you think John Fenton wants that?  The daily gossip sheet 
sent out by his coworkers?  Are you considering the liability issues here, 
while you are demanding that the UCD give updates to the public?
 
Al Krigman has already told the list how delighted he is to be able to use this 
incident - caused by Councilwoman Blackwell, John Fenton, the student, the 
Daily News and perhaps Tom Knox - to rally people against the UCD so he can try 
once again to kill the proposal where landlords would pay a small share of the 
cost of UCD's work.  Well, a good portion of the money the landlords would pay 
under the Business Improvement District initiative would be to EXPAND THE CLEAN 
AND SAFE EFFORTS John Fenton has been heading.  So list members, help Al out 
here, and if John has a job, it will be limited - in scope, and perhaps in 
time, too.  How long do you think the institutions will continue to pay the 
wages of John and his coworkers, if the community wants the services, but 
bedevils the institutions for funding it?
 
Glenn Moyer, who has made it clear on the list that he doesn't have any respect 
for any of our community institutions, is also enjoying the current mess.  Does 
anyone on this list doubt that Glenn would like to be rid of Friends of Clark 
Park, the UCD, Penn, and every other organized entity involved in our 
neighborhood?  Well, if Glenn helps Al rid UC of the UCD, then clearly John 
Fenton won't have a job, right?  And there will be no organization to help out 
Karen and Wendy when the street person strikes, no one to get the Water Dept. 
to replace the disappeared manhole covers pronto, no one..
 
So please, re-read Liz's questions and think about ways to get to a positive 
outcome appropriate for 

Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[Wilma de Soto]

Indeed he is NOT.  Glenn is beautiful people.  Quite talented as a musician.
He¹s from quality West Philadelphia African-American stock such as his late
father who was known as, ³The Mayor of 52nd St.²  Some of the ³Old Guard²,
longtime homeowners who valued school.

My parents and his were fighters against the School District, City Council,
whatever to ensure their children receive a good education.

They succeeded.

However, the spirit lives on.

Perhaps, Glenn is keeping that spirit going in his own way.  Not my way
perhaps, but then again my circumstances are different from his.


On 6/7/07 2:57 PM, "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I left before the end of the meeting (in order to post this report and then
> cover my day job). So I cannot testify for sure that they said nothing about
> it after I left. But I left when the Councilwoman left, and they hadn't said
> much by that point.
>  
> Bryan's position was made clear from the outset. First Thursday is a
> Penn-sponsored meeting. Analysis: no way would he venture an off-the-cuff
> opinion on the merits of somebody else's meeting. He's not stupid.
>  
> -- Tony West
>>  
>> - Original Message -
>>  
>> From:  Bill  Sanderson 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> Tony – one point of  clarity:  You mention the meeting agreeing on three
>> points.  Was  there any response from either Glenn Bryan or Lewis Wendell to
>> the idea of the  forum organized by Sharrief Ali?   I would expect the first
>> two  points to require further internal process, but I wonder if they were
>> able to  agree to participate in the forum?
>>  
>>  
> 

[UC] Liz asks great questions: where do we go from here?

[MLamond]

 
 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 5:46:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My questions include:

How do we thank John  Fenton?
Can his job and reputation  be saved?
Should we 
 save his job? 
lose  UCD? 
 settle for what we get (and thus  deserve)?
How do we prevent the  further co opting of UC by Politics, Penn and 
powerful  lurkers?
Do we support any person  or initiative at UCD?
?, ?,  ?



I totally agree with everything Liz asks here. We don't know the details -  
only John Fenton knows EVERYTHING - so we can't judge what  happened.  But, 
where do we go NEXT?
 
Didn't this problem come about because the Councilwoman asked John Fenton  to 
help out with SOMETHING, and he did?  She doesn't dispute  that that's what 
happened - the only question is what did she ask him  to help out with.  And 
then, didn't some student tell the Daily  News that John did something which 
was 
inconsistent with the tax  status of his employer and the law?  Isn't that 
how the  story came out?  From that start, how did anyone jump to the 
conclusion 
 that "UCD" is to blame?  It seems to me that the parties who participated  
were Jannie Blackwell, John Fenton, the student, the Daily News, and  perhaps 
Tom Knox.
 
Faced with this accusation from the student, wouldn't any responsible  
employer have no choice but to launch a thorough  investigation?  And wouldn't 
they 
have to keep things private  till they got to the bottom of it?  Don't those 
of you calling for  immediate answers understand that an employer has to 
protect his employees'  rights?  Would any of you want your employers updating 
the 
public about  what you might or might not have done wrong, before your company 
had all of the  facts?  Do you think John Fenton wants that?  The daily gossip 
sheet  sent out by his coworkers?  Are you considering  the liability issues 
here, while you are demanding that the  UCD give updates to the public?
 
Al Krigman has already told the list how delighted he is to be  able to use 
this incident - caused by Councilwoman Blackwell, John Fenton,  the student, 
the Daily News and perhaps Tom Knox - to rally people against  the UCD so he 
can 
try once again to kill the proposal where  landlords would pay a small share 
of the cost of UCD's work.  Well, a  good portion of the money the landlords 
would pay under the Business Improvement  District initiative would be to 
EXPAND THE CLEAN AND SAFE EFFORTS John  Fenton has been heading.  So list 
members, 
help Al out here, and if John  has a job, it will be limited - in scope, and 
perhaps in time, too.  How  long do you think the institutions will continue to 
pay the wages of John  and his coworkers, if the community wants the 
services, but bedevils the  institutions for funding it?
 
Glenn Moyer, who has made it clear on the list that he doesn't have any  
respect for any of our community institutions, is also enjoying the current  
mess. 
 Does anyone on this list doubt that Glenn would like  to be rid of Friends 
of Clark Park, the UCD, Penn, and every other  organized entity involved in our 
neighborhood?  Well, if Glenn  helps Al rid UC of the UCD, then clearly John 
Fenton won't have a job,  right?  And there will be no organization to help 
out Karen and  Wendy when the street person strikes, no one to get the Water 
Dept. to replace  the disappeared manhole covers pronto, no one..
 
So please, re-read Liz's questions and think about ways to get to a  positive 
outcome appropriate for the current situation - NOT based  on the libertarian 
politics of a frugal landlord, or the exaggerations of an  anti-establishment 
rabble-rouser, NOT based on behind-the-scenes "payback" for  old grudges, but 
based on "what happens next?"
 
It's hard to think of a way to turn this to a win/win situation, but  perhaps 
we can at least avoid having it be lose/lose.  
 
Melani Lamond
 
Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye,  Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone  215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax  215-222-1101



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

[UC] Re: So, who is Committeeman?

[Anthony West]

I agree in part, Liz. Any one case of disreputable behavior may have a 
reputable explanation or a helpful outcome.

But rules of thumb are still indispensable in everyday life. And we have seen 
anonymous posts on UC-list are strongly associated with malice, dishonesty and 
cowardice. These are all part of the Circle of Life; but so are mosquitos, and 
breast cancer. When somebody exhibits this behavior in public, it is 
disreputable and they should expect to make an impression of disreputability on 
others. UC-list is not a masked ball, where faking things is part of the game.

Anonymity has nothing to do with newbies either, from what I can see. Whenever 
I walk into a roomful of strangers (which I do all the time), I say, "Hi, I'm 
Tony." Identifying yourself is normal and easy, if you mean others no harm.

If you mean harm, an honorable print assailant takes especial pains to identify 
himself. Accuracy does not salvage this dishonor.

-- Tony West

  From: Elizabeth F Campion 

  I repeat, "I prefer attribution".
  My further comment was MHO, that said writer might have good reason to stay 
quiet and avoid any association with the straw figure, held up for immolation, 
by you and others.
  What may have been an oversight has been so roundly pounded beyond 
recognition, and the writer (possibly a hapless soul) defined as vile, 
sneaky, manipulative and part of some putative clique.

  I believe 'strangers' should be invited in, and bona fides revealed in a 
natural and organic manner.
  Most on this list are neighbors and even potential friends.
  "Newbies" should not be grabbed by the digital throat and shaken until they 
accept the pigeon hole assigned by the loudest bully.

  I'm not calling the post or subsequent silence the bravest or most honorable 
or smartest choice.
  But I'll note that it is hard to build relationships upon such a rocky start.
  C-7 may be choosing a new E-name as we speak.


  Committeeman7 did nothing wrong!
  Unfortunately he did nothing right.
  But the real harm is being caused by those who are abusing their talents and 
our time.

Re: So, who is Committeeman? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Ross Bender]

On 6/7/07, Elizabeth F Campion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Committeeman7 did nothing wrong!



He/she/it did something very wrong -- posted an anonymous message that not
only "annoyed" the listserve but caused a whole lot of trouble, igniting a
firefight and gangbang that resulted in a huge amount of damage to the list.

I'm not focusing on the anonymous posters' identity -- simply insisting on
the very basic principle that ANONYMOUS POSTING IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. PERIOD.

FWIW here is the text of the federal statute which became law in January
2006:



It's illegal to annoy

A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you
must disclose your identity. Here's the relevant language.

*"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate
telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in
whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and
with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives
the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more
than two years, or both."*
http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-annoyance,+go+to+jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html

While you may believe, as the above commentator does, that it's a stupid law
is beside the point. There's a very good reason for this type of statute,
even if it's unlikely to be enforced.


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

[UC] An interesting article on corporate ethics and corporate governance...

[Krfapt]

_http://www.uta.edu/faculty/mputnam/SPCH3309/Notes/EthicalTheories.html_ 
(http://www.uta.edu/faculty/mputnam/SPCH3309/Notes/EthicalTheories.html) 
 
The above is a link to an interesting piece from the University of Texas on  
corporate ethics and corporate governance. Much of it is relevant to the issue 
 current in UC on UCD:
a) On UCD's modus operandi in general
b) On UCD's investigation of the alleged problem
c) On "who takes the blame" -- scapegoating, denial of responsibility,  
organizational cultures.
 
 
Always at  your service & ready for a dialog,
Al  Krigman



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: So, who is Committeeman? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Elizabeth F Campion]

Ross,

I repeat, "I prefer attribution".
My further comment was MHO, that said writer might have good reason to
stay quiet and avoid any association with the straw figure, held up for
immolation, by you and others.
What may have been an oversight has been so roundly pounded beyond
recognition, and the writer (possibly a hapless soul) defined as
vile, sneaky, manipulative and part of some putative clique.

I believe 'strangers' should be invited in, and bona fides revealed in a
natural and organic manner.
Most on this list are neighbors and even potential friends.
"Newbies" should not be grabbed by the digital throat and shaken until
they accept the pigeon hole assigned by the loudest bully.

I'm not calling the post or subsequent silence the bravest or most
honorable or smartest choice.
But I'll note that it is hard to build relationships upon such a rocky
start.
C-7 may be choosing a new E-name as we speak.


Committeeman7 did nothing wrong!
Unfortunately he did nothing right.
But the real harm is being caused by those who are abusing their talents
and our time.

Focusing on C-7's identity is a distraction from the content of the
message and the much bigger issues of 
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
My questions include:
How do we thank John Fenton?
Can his job and reputation be saved?
Should we 
save his job? 
lose UCD? 
settle for what we get (and thus deserve)?
How do we prevent the further co opting of UC by Politics, Penn
and powerful lurkers?
Do we support any person or initiative at UCD?
?, ?, ?

Ask more, limit responses to facts and goals or clear opinions, not
gossip and speculation.
And stop attacking me.
I am not C-7.
I don't deserve the attacks and I don't like being grumpy or angry at you
and I don't like thinking of you as some overstuffed gnat that needs a
smack-down.  
I'd rather enjoy your civil company, in a friendly environment, where
body language and immediate feedback can provide the clues as to when
either of us has gone to far in a stupid direction.

Best!
Liz



On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 16:13:24 -0400 "Ross Bender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:



On 6/7/07, Elizabeth F Campion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I prefer attribution, but I understand why someone might not want to
expose themselves to the rampant paranoia, profligate speculation and
general nastiness that began to swirl around the 'offending' post, long
before a beginner might have twigged to list etiquette (or not) or a more
adept sender might have discovered an address oversight.


Many of our senders are known by insider nicknames.
Some of us include to much in our signatures, others too little, some
assume the E-address says it all.

 
Liz, I fail to understand why you're putting so much energy into
defending the practice of anonymous posting, which even the most hopeless
newbie realizes is a vile and scummy practice. There is absolutely no
excuse for sending messages under false names to a public email list. In
fact, it is technically illegal, although I can't cite the statute at the
moment. WTF is wrong with you today??? 



-- 
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html

Ph.D. in Love, Columbia University
D.Hon. Bob Jones University
Certificate in Cognitive Science, Institute of Glottopsychiatry,
University of Waterloo 
Chevalier, Legion d'Honneur
Lt., (Ret.) Queen's African Rifles
Voted Most Likely to Succeed, Goshen High School, 1967




Elizabeth Campion   Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax,  Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
 www.PruFoxRoach.com

RE: [UC] which bad thing?

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

So, UCD: what's wrong with agreeing that he'd made a mistake, and
letting him get back to his excellent work a bit wiser?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Siano
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 4:50 PM
Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] which bad thing?

I don't think we've learned anything substantial beyond the loss of John

Fenton.

When the news broke, there were any number of accounts, and any number 
of theories. In the first place, _did _Fenton have his crew do anything 
for the Knox campaign that day? I've heard tales that the kid who'd 
_claimed_ this had rescinded his claim, and Jannie Blackwell called it a

lie, but I ain't heard any solid answers on this.

And _if_ it happened, then why? Well, it doesn't seem likely that Fenton

or UCD are closet Knox supporters, and I recall Lewis Wendell getting 
flak for something involving Michael Nutter a few months back. It seems 
far _more_ plausible, to me, that someone under Knox or Blackwell 
might've asked John for some effort, and John may have agreed merely to 
be a decent guy. After all, it was a community event... and nobody who 
wants good relations with the community wants to piss off the local City

Councilperson. If _that_ was the case, then both Fenton and UCD were put

in a bad position. (I am not surprised that the people complaining about

UCD haven't pursued this alternate theory.)

If this did come down to an error in judgment on John's part... then 
firing him is a severe black mark against UCD. The guy does a great job.

He's probably the one asset UCD has that's universally praised around 
here. (And yes, I suspect many UCD 'critics' are privately ecstatic that

Fenton's gone; makes their hobby even easier.) So, UCD: what's wrong 
with agreeing that he'd made a mistake, and letting him get back to his 
excellent work a bit wiser?

So UCD followed institutional procedure; whether or not Fenton did 
anything wrong, it _could_ become a problem for UCD, so Fenton had to 
go. It's safer that way. But it makes UCD look pretty bad. We like to 
think of a community as something that's a bit more, well, 
understanding. Look at the petition that waas organzied in support of 
John Fenton. Decent community managers would have considered that, or 
addressed it. Who wants a community managed like a corporate culture?

(Of course, all of the above is _moot_ if it turned out that Fenton 
really _did_ abuse his authority to support Knox, screaming "Yes! I did 
it! I loved doing it! And I'd do it again! Muhahahaha!" at his 
interrogators during the investigation.)

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.





You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[Anthony West]

I agree with you completely, Ray. Let us frame it as a true dichotomy 
instead.


-- Tony West

Ray wrote:
I am leery of any of us framing this as a false dichotomy, as 'which bad 
thing?' let's be more constructive, shall we?




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[Brian Siano]

I don't think we've learned anything substantial beyond the loss of John 
Fenton.


When the news broke, there were any number of accounts, and any number 
of theories. In the first place, _did _Fenton have his crew do anything 
for the Knox campaign that day? I've heard tales that the kid who'd 
_claimed_ this had rescinded his claim, and Jannie Blackwell called it a 
lie, but I ain't heard any solid answers on this.


And _if_ it happened, then why? Well, it doesn't seem likely that Fenton 
or UCD are closet Knox supporters, and I recall Lewis Wendell getting 
flak for something involving Michael Nutter a few months back. It seems 
far _more_ plausible, to me, that someone under Knox or Blackwell 
might've asked John for some effort, and John may have agreed merely to 
be a decent guy. After all, it was a community event... and nobody who 
wants good relations with the community wants to piss off the local City 
Councilperson. If _that_ was the case, then both Fenton and UCD were put 
in a bad position. (I am not surprised that the people complaining about 
UCD haven't pursued this alternate theory.)


If this did come down to an error in judgment on John's part... then 
firing him is a severe black mark against UCD. The guy does a great job. 
He's probably the one asset UCD has that's universally praised around 
here. (And yes, I suspect many UCD 'critics' are privately ecstatic that 
Fenton's gone; makes their hobby even easier.) So, UCD: what's wrong 
with agreeing that he'd made a mistake, and letting him get back to his 
excellent work a bit wiser?


So UCD followed institutional procedure; whether or not Fenton did 
anything wrong, it _could_ become a problem for UCD, so Fenton had to 
go. It's safer that way. But it makes UCD look pretty bad. We like to 
think of a community as something that's a bit more, well, 
understanding. Look at the petition that waas organzied in support of 
John Fenton. Decent community managers would have considered that, or 
addressed it. Who wants a community managed like a corporate culture?


(Of course, all of the above is _moot_ if it turned out that Fenton 
really _did_ abuse his authority to support Knox, screaming "Yes! I did 
it! I loved doing it! And I'd do it again! Muhahahaha!" at his 
interrogators during the investigation.)


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Ross Bender]

On 6/7/07, Elizabeth F Campion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 I prefer attribution, but I understand why someone might not want to
expose themselves to the rampant paranoia, profligate speculation and
general nastiness that began to swirl around the 'offending' post, long
before a beginner might have twigged to list etiquette (or not) or a more
adept sender might have discovered an address oversight.


Many of our senders are known by insider nicknames.
Some of us include to much in our signatures, others too little, some
assume the E-address says it all.




Liz, I fail to understand why you're putting so much energy into defending
the practice of anonymous posting, which even the most hopeless newbie
realizes is a vile and scummy practice. There is absolutely no excuse for
sending messages under false names to a public email list. In fact, it is
technically illegal, although I can't cite the statute at the moment. WTF is
wrong with you today???



--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html

Ph.D. in Love, Columbia University
D.Hon. Bob Jones University
Certificate in Cognitive Science, Institute of Glottopsychiatry, University
of Waterloo
Chevalier, Legion d'Honneur
Lt., (Ret.) Queen's African Rifles
Voted Most Likely to Succeed, Goshen High School, 1967

Re: [UC] Moon Bounce Catching on at Political Rallies

[Ross Bender]

On 6/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 In a message dated 6/7/2007 3:46:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

It is not every day that the words "moon bounce" and "Madeleine Albright"
appear in the same press release, but Hillary Clinton achieved just such a
feat in her promotion of last night's "block party" in a parking lot in
downtown Washington.

 Don't tell me that UCD set up the moon bounce and the Hillary for Queen
posters with indentured servant labor from West Philadelphia. Melani... say
it isn't so.




Actually, what stunned me about the whole event were the "blow-up Uncle Sam
dolls". Article doesn't specify their size and whether they were um
anatomically  accurate.


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Elizabeth F Campion]

I prefer attribution, but I understand why someone might not want to
expose themselves to the rampant paranoia, profligate speculation and
general nastiness that began to swirl around the 'offending' post, long
before a beginner might have twigged to list etiquette (or not) or a more
adept sender might have discovered an address oversight.
 

Many of our senders are known by insider nicknames.
Some of us include to much in our signatures, others too little, some
assume the E-address says it all.

I'm fairly fearless, but the remarks are so awful that I'd be reluctant
to admit to being the poster.


One irony, the post turned out to be accurate, and still the poster is
referred to as dishonest.


Meanwhile, among the latest gentle requests for introduction...

Cassidy wrote:
"I'd say it's relevant because:
 
... So the question "why did committeeman7 make the post and then leave
Glenn to fend for himself amongst the jackles?" I think is relevant. And
now we discover that it was probably someone who was at the meeting or
who works for someone who was at the meeting
 
Maybe it was UCD!
In a message dated 6/7/2007 11:05:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


Really?  Our "little list" of over 300 University City folks who care
enough about what's happening in this community to stay aboard, despite
having to endure frequently nasty exchanges and messages?  We don't
count?  We can be lied to, or spoken to anonymously by folks who refuse
to reveal their identities?

According to Tony's report, the first Thursday meeting <<... asked that
UCD policies in general be made public.>>  

What about the Councilwoman's office's policies?  Shouldn't they be
public also?  We elect her; should her office and/or her supporters be
sending anonymous emails to the listserv?  Or was it sent by an anonymous
supporter of John Fenton?  Or somebody who just guessed about today's
meeting, and just happened to be right?  In any case, what is to be
gained by adding new layers of secrecy to neighborhood processes? 
Committeeman7 knew what was going to happen today and is probably reading
my questions on the list now.  Who is he, or she, and why is this person
afraid to identify him or herself?

... ...

My guess, now, is that our anonymous poster, Committeeman7, is either
affiliated with the Councilwoman's office or has inside information from
the Councilwoman's office.  Why doesn't the person simply identify
him/her/self and be honest and open with us?  Why operate secretly?  Why
didn't Jannie's office confirm their plans for the first Thursday meeting
when Tony called, if they were collecting signatures and planning to ask
for support?  What were they hiding?  Have they missed all the calls on
this list for transparency and process?  

Melani Lamond


Best!
Liz
 
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 10:35:05 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tony, thank you for this thorough and important update.  A question
remains about the person who posted about it to our listserv.

My guess, now, is that our anonymous poster, Committeeman7, is either
affiliated with the Councilwoman's office or has inside information from
the Councilwoman's office.  Why doesn't the person simply identify
him/her/self and be honest and open with us?  Why operate secretly?  Why
didn't Jannie's office confirm their plans for the first Thursday meeting
when Tony called, if they were collecting signatures and planning to ask
for support?  What were they hiding?  Have they missed all the calls on
this list for transparency and process?  

Melani Lamond

Re: [UC] Moon Bounce Catching on at Political Rallies

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 3:46:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

It is not every day that the words "moon bounce" and  "Madeleine Albright" 
appear in the same press release, but Hillary Clinton  achieved just such a 
feat 
in her promotion of last night's "block party" in a  parking lot in downtown 
Washington.



Don't tell me that UCD set up the moon bounce and the Hillary for Queen  
posters with indentured servant labor from West Philadelphia. Melani... say it  
isn't so.
 
Al



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

[UC] Moon Bounce Catching on at Political Rallies

[Ross Bender]

It is not every day that the words "moon bounce" and "Madeleine Albright"
appear in the same press release, but Hillary Clinton achieved just such a
feat in her promotion of last night's "block party" in a parking lot in
downtown Washington.

...

The elements for a youthful event were all there: a juggler, face-painting
(a custom Hillary heart design was available), blow-up Uncle Sam dolls, the
vendor selling Red Bull and, of course, the "United We Stand" moon bounce.
The campaign even handed out a Hillary crossword puzzle and word-search game
(quick, kids: Find "Strategic Energy Fund," "Modern Progressive" and
"Universal Pre-K").

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/06/AR2007060602520.html

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html

Re: [UC] which bad thing?

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Anthony West wrote:
Foes of UCD will understandably rejoice in the clear public rebuke 
issued it by Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell today. But those who believe 
UCD made a mistake face a challenge of their own: decide which action to 
highlight for blame and which to forgive.
 
Those who would fault UCD for potentially engaging in political 
activity, thereby running afoul of its 501 requirements, necessarily 
require an internal investigation that is both thorough and discreet. 
They cannot demand prompt, swift disclosure of anything until an 
investigation is finished, nor can they expect any investigation  of 
importance to be wrapped up in a few weeks.
 
Those who would fault UCD for relieving John Fenton of his duties and 
not wrapping up this investigation swiftly must, then, accept that no 
501 issue of substance arose worthy of investigation.
 
I don't have an opinion as to the rights of the case. I do know that 
complex issues -- on the one hand political, on the other hand legal -- 
surround either judgement. And I am always leery of people who give out 
free legal advice for problems they know only other people must pay for, 
if their advice turns out to be wrong.



I am leery of any of us framing this as a false dichotomy, 
as 'which bad thing?' let's be more constructive, shall we?


please let's let things breathe a little more before jumping 
to frame a set of choices, a set of blames. there may be 
more (or less!) than the ones you propose.




..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
  "It is very clear on this listserve who
   these people are. Ray has admitted being
   connected to this forger."  -- Tony West




























































__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] which bad thing?

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

I disagree Tony. If I learned anything today..it was.
 
"IT WAS ALL BULLSHIT" from the beginning.
 
..with no merit at all. No facts, no proof, no disclosure,
thoughtless, petty, insulting, political, and a big crock!
 
John was "right-sized" for strictly personal reasons.
 
 
S
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 3:10 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] which bad thing?
 
Foes of UCD will understandably rejoice in the clear public rebuke
issued it by Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell today. But those who believe
UCD made a mistake face a challenge of their own: decide which action to
highlight for blame and which to forgive.
 
Those who would fault UCD for potentially engaging in political
activity, thereby running afoul of its 501 requirements, necessarily
require an internal investigation that is both thorough and discreet.
They cannot demand prompt, swift disclosure of anything until an
investigation is finished, nor can they expect any investigation  of
importance to be wrapped up in a few weeks.
 
Those who would fault UCD for relieving John Fenton of his duties and
not wrapping up this investigation swiftly must, then, accept that no
501 issue of substance arose worthy of investigation.
 
I don't have an opinion as to the rights of the case. I do know that
complex issues -- on the one hand political, on the other hand legal --
surround either judgement. And I am always leery of people who give out
free legal advice for problems they know only other people must pay for,
if their advice turns out to be wrong.
 
-- Tony West
 

[UC] which bad thing?

[Anthony West]

Foes of UCD will understandably rejoice in the clear public rebuke issued it by 
Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell today. But those who believe UCD made a mistake 
face a challenge of their own: decide which action to highlight for blame and 
which to forgive.

Those who would fault UCD for potentially engaging in political activity, 
thereby running afoul of its 501 requirements, necessarily require an internal 
investigation that is both thorough and discreet. They cannot demand prompt, 
swift disclosure of anything until an investigation is finished, nor can they 
expect any investigation  of importance to be wrapped up in a few weeks.

Those who would fault UCD for relieving John Fenton of his duties and not 
wrapping up this investigation swiftly must, then, accept that no 501 issue of 
substance arose worthy of investigation.

I don't have an opinion as to the rights of the case. I do know that complex 
issues -- on the one hand political, on the other hand legal -- surround either 
judgement. And I am always leery of people who give out free legal advice for 
problems they know only other people must pay for, if their advice turns out to 
be wrong.

-- Tony West

Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[Anthony West]

I left before the end of the meeting (in order to post this report and then 
cover my day job). So I cannot testify for sure that they said nothing about it 
after I left. But I left when the Councilwoman left, and they hadn't said much 
by that point.

Bryan's position was made clear from the outset. First Thursday is a 
Penn-sponsored meeting. Analysis: no way would he venture an off-the-cuff 
opinion on the merits of somebody else's meeting. He's not stupid.

-- Tony West
  - Original Message - 
  From: Bill Sanderson 

  Tony - one point of clarity:  You mention the meeting agreeing on three 
points.  Was there any response from either Glenn Bryan or Lewis Wendell to the 
idea of the forum organized by Sharrief Ali?   I would expect the first two 
points to require further internal process, but I wonder if they were able to 
agree to participate in the forum?

   

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Anthony West]

I believe the Councilwoman was sincere when she said on Tuesday she had not yet 
made up her mind whether to attend First Thursday at all. Close of session is a 
very busy time for Council Persons. So while the anonymous poster may have had 
some connection with her organization, I don't believe he was carrying out 
orders from above.

Most likely, the flow of events from Tuesday to Thursday pushed Blackwell into 
deciding to act. I know that some of the things she spoke publicly this morning 
have been on her mind for a long time.

-- Tony West
  My guess, now, is that our anonymous poster, Committeeman7, is either 
affiliated with the Councilwoman's office or has inside information from the 
Councilwoman's office.  Why doesn't the person simply identify him/her/self and 
be honest and open with us?  Why operate secretly?  Why didn't Jannie's office 
confirm their plans for the first Thursday meeting when Tony called, if they 
were collecting signatures and planning to ask for support?  What were they 
hiding?  Have they missed all the calls on this list for transparency and 
process?  

  Melani Lamond

Re: [UC] Does this mean what it seems to say?

[Glenn]

that the so-called "internal investigation" consisted of Wendell, Paul Levy, 
and Barry Grossbach trying to save UCD

Whether there were more people involved wasn't said.  Those names came up. Why 
is Levy involved? 

And apparently, the actions against Mr. Fenton were very swift.  The gag order 
and the report of a six month pay is a problem.

We asked Mr. Wendell to confirm or deny the actions against Mr. Fenton, but I 
don't believe he did either.

Glenn
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 2:17 PM
  Subject: [UC] Does this mean what it seems to say?


  In a message dated 6/7/2007 1:14:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] writes:
She told us that Mr. Levy from CCD and the UCD Board member from SHCA were 
involved with the decision.
  I don't want to be accused of "reading things into the tea leaves," so I'll 
ask this as a question rather than state it as an opinion. Does this mean what 
it seems to say? Namely, that the so-called "internal investigation" consisted 
of Wendell, Paul Levy, and Barry Grossbach trying to save UCD as it's evolved 
rather than "clean and safe" operation it's supposed to be, and preserve hopes 
for the NID (now a totally lost cause, of course) by putting all the blame for 
an over-reaching poorly-managed organization on John and shutting him up with 
half a year's pay?

  Al Krigman,
  If they're gonna act like they think they're Ivan Grozny, 
  they should at least think about how to pull it off!







--
  See what's free at AOL.com. 


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/837 - Release Date: 6/6/2007 2:03 
PM

Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[Glenn]

Sharrieff,

I think it is important to remind everyone that it was reported that Mr. Fenton 
is under some type of gag order.  How can we trust any organization doing an 
internal investigation of its wrongdoing when they are imposing a gag order?  
That is cover-up not disclosure.

Honestly, I hope we are successful at having this community forum done sooner 
than later.  If the UCD fails to appear and refuses to disclose the information 
the people request, I personally hope that we demand that the major 
shareholders in UCD reorganize it.  

.John Fenton's work on the street cleaning and service projects was the 
successful part of UCD.  If the major share holders of a special service 
district really want community engagement, in the future; we must be included 
in honest and transparent processes and the organization must have accountable 
and competent leadership.

I think the shareholders and we resident stakeholders would be better served if 
they got rid of the existing Board and Executive staff and rehired John to 
focus on the street cleaning.  

Everything about John's treatment should leave no one in doubt that there is no 
investigation but a cover-up and a scapegoat!

Sincerely,
Glenn
  - Original Message - 
  From: S. Sharrieff Ali 
  To: 'Bill Sanderson' ; UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:56 PM
  Subject: RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job


  Bill:

   

  The motion carried and was without opposition to have a community meeting 
organized by

  "concerned community residents". I made the motion and volunteered to make 
sure the meeting

  happened. 20 people signed to participate in a committee to organize the 
meeting.

   

  Glenn Bryan's "Penn" meeting was hijacked by a broader community issue today, 
all other

  agenda items took a back seat, particularly to the indictments of 
Councilwoman Blackwell.

   

  The idea was not to rely on the UCD or Penn to organize a meeting. It was 
clear everyone 

  in the room who was aware of the issue with John stood outraged by his 
treatment, the lack of 

  information prepared by UCD to release to the public, and the revelation of 
John's "forced resignation" 

  as we were told today. 

   

  It was clear to me UCD has been advised by legal to say nothing besides the 
very short statement 

  released. Channel 6 WPVI News attended, filmed part of the meeting and took 
statements from a few 

  attendees.

   

  Councilwoman Blackwell stated she viewed the situation with John as a 
particular affront on her reputation 

  for political reasons.

   

  The UC-Review has volunteered to moderate the community meeting with a 
suggested location of 

  Rosenberger Hall. It would be wise for representatives of the Board of UCD to 
participate as well as the 

  trustees committees of the institutions represented. 

   

  It is not about "Sharrieff Ali" putting a meeting together as an excuse not 
to attend. Unanimously the 

  "community" is behind the effort to get answers, the meeting is a part of the 
process. As Tony mentioned, 

  there was a petition of 300 signatures in support of John which had already 
been forwarded to Councilwoman 

  Blackwell's office.

   

  I will post information as I get it. If anyone on the listserv would like to 
join the committee, e-mail me

  off-list.

   

  S

   

   

  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Sanderson
  Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:20 AM
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
  Subject: RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

   

  Tony - one point of clarity:  You mention the meeting agreeing on three 
points.  Was there any response from either Glenn Bryan or Lewis Wendell to the 
idea of the forum organized by Sharrief Ali?   I would expect the first two 
points to require further internal process, but I wonder if they were able to 
agree to participate in the forum?

   


--

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony West
  Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 10:02 AM
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
  Subject: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

   

  Two days after her office had said Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell had no plans 
to update the community about the Fenton-Knox affair in Malcolm X Park at the 
First Thursday meeting, she showed up promptly and did just that. She went much 
farther, angrily baring a serious rift between Univesrsity City District and 
her.

   

  She delivered petitions with 300 signatures in support of Fenton. The room at 
Walnut St. West Library, filled as usual with 70 people, most of them 
representatives from more than three dozen agencies and organizations that are 
active in West Philadelphia, noisily concurred and made forceful pleas to 
retain the popular UCD employee in his job. There was universal agreement 
Fenton has been 

Re: [UC] The Penn meeting

[missthin]

Jennifer,

Glenn wrote:

John Fenton was immediately barred from UCD headquarters and ordered not to
discuss the controversy with employees or anyone else. She told us that Mr.
Fenton has been forced to resign and has been given a six-month severance.
She told us that Mr. Levy from CCD and the UCD Board member from SHCA were
involved with the decision.

That says to me that yes, he certainly was fired.  Looks like after he was
barred from even entering UCD headquarters or talking to any of the staff.
Outrageous.

I'd like to know who the SHCA board member is.

Wendy

On 6/7/07, Jennifer Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 Did he get fired?

Jennifer

Cedar Park


 --

*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *missthin
*Sent:* Thursday, June 07, 2007 2:17 PM
*To:* Glenn
*Cc:* UnivCity@list.purple.com
*Subject:* Re: [UC] The Penn meeting



Glenn,

Thanks for posting what you saw/heard at this meeting.

I understand John being told not to discuss anything with anyone outside
of UCD, as there is this alleged "internal investigation".  That sounds par
for the course.  Not discussing with anyone at UCD I find somewhat odd.
But, whatever.

What I really am right now is outraged.  I, like many others, believed
(and still do believe) that John was being used as a scapegoat for a bad
situation.  This reeks of jealousy and animosity.

That it took this long for John, staff and the community to finally know
the outcome of his supposed 2 week with pay suspension just adds to my
feeling that this entire episode was in some way a set-up.  And no, I'm not
a conspiracy theorist.

After all the good John and his crew have done for this community in
general and for my roommate and I in particular, that he should be treated
this way, simply thrown out like so much trash is absolutely appalling.

I recall when Karen was assaulted by Chris that 2 UCD bike patrolmen got
here before the police and once Karen went off to the station to file her
complaint, they stayed until Brian was able to get here and get the front
door boarded up.  Then there are the general block clean-ups.  John and his
crew have done a great job of trying to get the word out, handing out
supplies to the neighbors and helping with the actual clean-up and trash bag
removal.   Just 2 examples of the good that's been done in the past and will
not be seen again.

The loss of John Fenton is a huge one for all of us here in the village.
He's gone above and beyond, including nights, weekends, days off for so many
of us for so many different reasons -- think manhole cover replacing. I know
I've felt safer walking around knowing that John and his crew are out and
about.   What this could be doing to the morale of the crew I have to wonder
too.

To the UCD Board and Mr. Wendell:  Shame on you.  You've succeeded in
cutting off your nose to spite your face by firing Mr. Fenton and having
Marty removed from the UCD Board.  He is another individual who lives here,
listens, cares and tries to help when and where he can.

Another angry, upset supporter of John Fenton

Wendy


 On 6/7/07, *Glenn* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:

Let me give you some of the information from the Penn meeting.

First, Councilwoman Blackwell told us that John Fenton was immediately
barred from UCD headquarters and ordered not to discuss the controversy with
employees or anyone else. She told us that Mr. Fenton has been forced to
resign and has been given a six-month severance. She told us that Mr. Levy
from CCD and the UCD Board member from SHCA were involved with the decision.
She tried to be involved in the decision about Mr. Fenton but was very angry
about the treatment she received from UCD.

She also told us that her staff person, Marty, was removed from the UCD
board as was Glenn Bryan. She echoed the complaints coming from many of us
that UCD is not accountable.

I introduced one of the motions that I believe carried without dissent: I
believe I said:

We, at the first Thursday meeting, insist that UCD make full disclosures
of policies and processes to facilitate transparency and accountability
appropriate for a special services district.

Freda made the motion to retain John Fenton. Sharrieff made the motion to
facilitate a community forum about this issue so that the community might
ask all questions directly to UCD.

It was quite clear that while the institutional folks remained quiet, the
community sentiment was clearly that both Mr. Fenton and Councilwoman
Blackwell were being targeted for blame while the UCD was not forthcoming.
 On several occasions, the councilwoman received applause.

Mr. Lewis Wendell read the previously released statement. He did not give
a progress report about the "internal investigation" or any information
about an expected date to release findings.

If I can be helpful to answer any other questions on list I will try to
help.

Sincerely,

Glenn Moyer

[UC] Does this mean what it seems to say?

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 1:14:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

She told  us that Mr. Levy from CCD and the UCD Board member from SHCA were 
involved  with the decision.


I don't want to be accused of "reading things into the tea leaves," so I'll  
ask this as a question rather than state it as an opinion. Does this mean  
what it seems to say? Namely, that the so-called "internal investigation"  
consisted of Wendell, Paul Levy, and Barry Grossbach trying to save UCD as it's 
 
evolved rather than "clean and safe" operation it's supposed to be, and  
preserve 
hopes for the NID (now a totally lost cause, of course) by  putting all the 
blame for an over-reaching poorly-managed organization on John  and shutting 
him up with half a year's pay?
 
Al Krigman,
If they're gonna act like they think they're Ivan Grozny, 
they should at least think about how to pull it  off!
 
 



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] The Penn meeting

[missthin]

Glenn,

Thanks for posting what you saw/heard at this meeting.

I understand John being told not to discuss anything with anyone outside of
UCD, as there is this alleged "internal investigation".  That sounds par for
the course.  Not discussing with anyone at UCD I find somewhat odd.  But,
whatever.

What I really am right now is outraged.  I, like many others, believed (and
still do believe) that John was being used as a scapegoat for a bad
situation.  This reeks of jealousy and animosity.

That it took this long for John, staff and the community to finally know the
outcome of his supposed 2 week with pay suspension just adds to my feeling
that this entire episode was in some way a set-up.  And no, I'm not a
conspiracy theorist.

After all the good John and his crew have done for this community in general
and for my roommate and I in particular, that he should be treated this way,
simply thrown out like so much trash is absolutely appalling.

I recall when Karen was assaulted by Chris that 2 UCD bike patrolmen got
here before the police and once Karen went off to the station to file her
complaint, they stayed until Brian was able to get here and get the front
door boarded up.  Then there are the general block clean-ups.  John and his
crew have done a great job of trying to get the word out, handing out
supplies to the neighbors and helping with the actual clean-up and trash bag
removal.   Just 2 examples of the good that's been done in the past and will
not be seen again.

The loss of John Fenton is a huge one for all of us here in the village.
He's gone above and beyond, including nights, weekends, days off for so many
of us for so many different reasons -- think manhole cover replacing. I know
I've felt safer walking around knowing that John and his crew are out and
about.   What this could be doing to the morale of the crew I have to wonder
too.

To the UCD Board and Mr. Wendell:  Shame on you.  You've succeeded in
cutting off your nose to spite your face by firing Mr. Fenton and having
Marty removed from the UCD Board.  He is another individual who lives here,
listens, cares and tries to help when and where he can.

Another angry, upset supporter of John Fenton

Wendy



On 6/7/07, Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 Let me give you some of the information from the Penn meeting.

First, Councilwoman Blackwell told us that John Fenton was immediately
barred from UCD headquarters and ordered not to discuss the controversy with
employees or anyone else. She told us that Mr. Fenton has been forced to
resign and has been given a six-month severance. She told us that Mr. Levy
from CCD and the UCD Board member from SHCA were involved with the decision.
She tried to be involved in the decision about Mr. Fenton but was very angry
about the treatment she received from UCD.

She also told us that her staff person, Marty, was removed from the UCD
board as was Glenn Bryan. She echoed the complaints coming from many of us
that UCD is not accountable.

I introduced one of the motions that I believe carried without dissent: I
believe I said:

We, at the first Thursday meeting, insist that UCD make full disclosures
of policies and processes to facilitate transparency and accountability
appropriate for a special services district.

Freda made the motion to retain John Fenton. Sharrieff made the motion to
facilitate a community forum about this issue so that the community might
ask all questions directly to UCD.

It was quite clear that while the institutional folks remained quiet, the
community sentiment was clearly that both Mr. Fenton and Councilwoman
Blackwell were being targeted for blame while the UCD was not forthcoming.
 On several occasions, the councilwoman received applause.

Mr. Lewis Wendell read the previously released statement. He did not give
a progress report about the "internal investigation" or any information
about an expected date to release findings.

If I can be helpful to answer any other questions on list I will try to
help.

Sincerely,

Glenn Moyer

RE: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's...

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

There is no reason to assume there is a connection between the anonymous
post and Councilwoman Blackwell's Office.
 
It is really irrelevant. The community meetings are open to everyone.
Usually,
there is a representative or 2 from UCD and Councilwoman Blackwell has 
personally attended over the past few months.
 
Lets stick to the real issues.
 
The remarks from Jannie Blackwell and numerous members of the community
were 
unanimously in support of John Fenton and particularly critical of UCD's
handling of the 
Fenton issue.
 
Fentonize indeed.
 
 
S
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to
save Fenton's...
 

In a message dated 6/7/07 10:59:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:




In a message dated 6/7/2007 10:36:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

A question remains about the person who posted about it to our listserv.

A desperate attempt at diverting attention from the real issue -- namely
the apparent discontent with UCD shown at the meeting by just about
everyone concerned.
 
Al Krigman

What happened at the meeting has been clearly documented and explained,
thanks to Tony's post.  

Who Committeeman7 is, has not.  

Do you know the answer, Al?




Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101


**
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

Bill:
 
The motion carried and was without opposition to have a community
meeting organized by
"concerned community residents". I made the motion and volunteered to
make sure the meeting
happened. 20 people signed to participate in a committee to organize the
meeting.
 
Glenn Bryan's "Penn" meeting was hijacked by a broader community issue
today, all other
agenda items took a back seat, particularly to the indictments of
Councilwoman Blackwell.
 
The idea was not to rely on the UCD or Penn to organize a meeting. It
was clear everyone 
in the room who was aware of the issue with John stood outraged by his
treatment, the lack of 
information prepared by UCD to release to the public, and the revelation
of John's "forced resignation" 
as we were told today. 
 
It was clear to me UCD has been advised by legal to say nothing besides
the very short statement 
released. Channel 6 WPVI News attended, filmed part of the meeting and
took statements from a few 
attendees.
 
Councilwoman Blackwell stated she viewed the situation with John as a
particular affront on her reputation 
for political reasons.
 
The UC-Review has volunteered to moderate the community meeting with a
suggested location of 
Rosenberger Hall. It would be wise for representatives of the Board of
UCD to participate as well as the 
trustees committees of the institutions represented. 
 
It is not about "Sharrieff Ali" putting a meeting together as an excuse
not to attend. Unanimously the 
"community" is behind the effort to get answers, the meeting is a part
of the process. As Tony mentioned, 
there was a petition of 300 signatures in support of John which had
already been forwarded to Councilwoman 
Blackwell's office.
 
I will post information as I get it. If anyone on the listserv would
like to join the committee, e-mail me
off-list.
 
S
 
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Sanderson
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:20 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job
 
Tony - one point of clarity:  You mention the meeting agreeing on three
points.  Was there any response from either Glenn Bryan or Lewis Wendell
to the idea of the forum organized by Sharrief Ali?   I would expect the
first two points to require further internal process, but I wonder if
they were able to agree to participate in the forum?
 
  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 10:02 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job
 
Two days after her office had said Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell had no
plans to update the community about the Fenton-Knox affair in Malcolm X
Park at the First Thursday meeting, she showed up promptly and did just
that. She went much farther, angrily baring a serious rift between
Univesrsity City District and her.
 
She delivered petitions with 300 signatures in support of Fenton. The
room at Walnut St. West Library, filled as usual with 70 people, most of
them representatives from more than three dozen agencies and
organizations that are active in West Philadelphia, noisily concurred
and made forceful pleas to retain the popular UCD employee in his job.
There was universal agreement Fenton has been a tireless supporter of
the labors of all civic groups to improve their community.
 
Blackwell charged Fenton was being offered resignation with a severance
package from UCD. She said she had asked to find ways to help underwrite
his work but had been rebuffed. She said she had suggested mediators for
the dispute but had been rebuffed.
 
UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell attended the meeting. He read a
previously published statement. Fenton, he reiterated, is still on paid
administrative leave pending the results of an internal investigation.
In addition, he said, "We are in discussions to resolve the matter."
 
Blackwell repeated her denial that she had involved Fenton or his
community service team with a political rally for Tom Knox in the park.
"Everybody knows I supported Tom Knox for Mayor," she said. "A couple of
weeks before the election, the other candidates began releasing their
supporters to support Michael Nutter. They didn't want Knox to win
because he was an outsider. Nutter had no constituency of his own."
 
But the community service team was not involved in the Knox rally, she
said. Instead, it was engaged in park cleanup and facilitation of
another event, a fair that was going on in the park.
 
In this case, the Councilwoman said, her eyes flashing, "John Fenton and
UCD did what they do. I work with Penn and UCD. But somebody decided to
lie on him. I'm very disappointed."
 
Blackwell expressed her view that UCD has been slighting her in other
ways for some time.
 
Although First Thursday is not a parliamentary body, Penn's Community
Relations Director Glenn Bryan ceded the floor to the Councilwoman.
Community members raised thre

RE: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's...

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

There is no reason to assume there is a connection between the anonymous
post and Councilwoman Blackwell's Office.
 
It is really irrelevant. The community meetings are open to everyone.
Usually,
there is a representative or 2 from UCD and Councilwoman Blackwell has 
personally attended over the past few months.
 
Lets stick to the real issues.
 
The remarks from Jannie Blackwell and numerous members of the community
were 
unanimously in support of John Fenton and particularly critical of UCD's
handling of the 
Fenton issue.
 
Fentonize indeed.
 
 
S
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to
save Fenton's...
 

In a message dated 6/7/07 10:59:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:




In a message dated 6/7/2007 10:36:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

A question remains about the person who posted about it to our listserv.

A desperate attempt at diverting attention from the real issue -- namely
the apparent discontent with UCD shown at the meeting by just about
everyone concerned.
 
Al Krigman

What happened at the meeting has been clearly documented and explained,
thanks to Tony's post.  

Who Committeeman7 is, has not.  

Do you know the answer, Al?




Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101


**
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

[UC] Jannie Blackwell supports John Fenton, and so do I

[Karen Heenan]

I was glad to hear that Councilwoman Blackwell stood up at the meeting this 
morning in support of John Fenton.  This issue has led to so much wholesale 
UCD bashing that the important thing – John himself, and the work he does – 
has gotten a little bit lost in the shuffle.  That’s a shame because almost 
everyone in this neighborhood, whether or not they like UCD, likes him.  
Here we have a man who everyone can agree on does a good job and is popular 
in the community (perhaps part of the problem?), sitting around wasting his 
talents and energy while the UCD investigates itself.


Four years ago, not long before I met John Fenton, my house and I were 
assaulted by a homeless man named Chris who used to hang around 45th Street. 
 Chris who would occasionally ring the doorbell, sometimes throw bottles at 
the porch, keep everyone on the street awake at night with his yelling, and 
once, memorably, smashed my plate glass front door with me standing right 
there behind it.


There were many people in the neighborhood who helped and supported me at 
that time, including the UCD ambassadors who showed up first, the police, 
and Brian Siano with a 1 a.m. emergency plywood delivery, but John Fenton 
was the man who went with me to court and had his ambassadors keep a lookout 
for Chris on my block when he was released from prison.  John did all this 
willingly and without my asking him to do it.  That is above and beyond what 
UCD pays him for, and that is why he’s so valuable to this community.


I hope that UCD sees by this email, and by anything else you all choose to 
add, that in addition to damaging John Fenton by this suspension, they are 
hurting themselves and the rest of the community.


Karen Heenan
228 S. 45th Street



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] The Penn meeting

[Glenn]

Let me give you some of the information from the Penn meeting.

First, Councilwoman Blackwell told us that John Fenton was immediately barred 
from UCD headquarters and ordered not to discuss the controversy with employees 
or anyone else. She told us that Mr. Fenton has been forced to resign and has 
been given a six-month severance. She told us that Mr. Levy from CCD and the 
UCD Board member from SHCA were involved with the decision. She tried to be 
involved in the decision about Mr. Fenton but was very angry about the 
treatment she received from UCD.

She also told us that her staff person, Marty, was removed from the UCD board 
as was Glenn Bryan. She echoed the complaints coming from many of us that UCD 
is not accountable.

I introduced one of the motions that I believe carried without dissent: I 
believe I said:

We, at the first Thursday meeting, insist that UCD make full disclosures of 
policies and processes to facilitate transparency and accountability 
appropriate for a special services district. 

Freda made the motion to retain John Fenton. Sharrieff made the motion to 
facilitate a community forum about this issue so that the community might ask 
all questions directly to UCD.

It was quite clear that while the institutional folks remained quiet, the 
community sentiment was clearly that both Mr. Fenton and Councilwoman Blackwell 
were being targeted for blame while the UCD was not forthcoming.  On several 
occasions, the councilwoman received applause.

Mr. Lewis Wendell read the previously released statement. He did not give a 
progress report about the "internal investigation" or any information about an 
expected date to release findings. 

If I can be helpful to answer any other questions on list I will try to help.

Sincerely,

Glenn Moyer

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's...

[MLamond]

> In a message dated 6/7/2007 11:05:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>  Who Committeeman7 is, has not [been clarified].
> 
> 
In a message dated 6/7/07 12:06:01 PM, Krfapt writes:
>  What's the relevance? The posting on our little list had nothing to do 
> with what happened at the meeting.
>  Al
> 
> 
Really?   Our "little list" of over 300 University City folks who care enough 
about what's happening in this community to stay aboard, despite having to 
endure frequently nasty exchanges and messages?   We don't count?   We can be 
lied to, or spoken to anonymously by folks who refuse to reveal their 
identities?

According to Tony's report, the first Thursday meeting <<... asked that UCD 
policies in general be made public.>>   

What about the Councilwoman's office's policies?   Shouldn't they be public 
also?   We elect her; should her office and/or her supporters be sending 
anonymous emails to the listserv?   Or was it sent by an anonymous supporter of 
John 
Fenton?   Or somebody who just guessed about today's meeting, and just 
happened to be right?   In any case, what is to be gained by adding new layers 
of 
secrecy to neighborhood processes?   Committeeman7 knew what was going to 
happen 
today and is probably reading my questions on the list now.   Who is he, or 
she, and why is this person afraid to identify him or herself?

Al, you didn't answer my question:   do you know?

Melani Lamond



Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101


**
 See what's free 
at http://www.aol.com.

RE: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's...

[Kyle Cassidy]

I'd say it's relevant because:

1) committeeman7 aparantly had insider knowledge about what was going to
happen at the meeting. What they posted
   was, it seems, exactly what happened at the meeting.
2) when Glenn was falsely accused about being the poster and there 
   was SIGNIFICANT fallout, committeeman7 did not come forward and say 
   "Woah dudes, lay off, I'm not Glenn. I made a factual post."

So the question "why did committeeman7 make the post and then leave
Glenn to fend for himself amongst the jackles?" I think is relevant. And
now we discover that it was probably someone who was at the meeting or
who works for someone who was at the meeting

Maybe it was UCD!

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]

In a message dated 6/7/2007 11:05:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Who Committeeman7 is, has not. 

What's the relevance? The posting on our little list had nothing to do
with what happened at the meeting.
 
Al





See what's free at AOL.com
 . 


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[Frank]

He's toast.

On Jun 7, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Anthony West wrote:

Two days after her office had said Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell  
had no plans to update the community about the Fenton-Knox affair  
in Malcolm X Park at the First Thursday meeting, she showed up  
promptly and did just that. She went much farther, angrily baring a  
serious rift between Univesrsity City District and her.


She delivered petitions with 300 signatures in support of Fenton.  
The room at Walnut St. West Library, filled as usual with 70  
people, most of them representatives from more than three dozen  
agencies and organizations that are active in West Philadelphia,  
noisily concurred and made forceful pleas to retain the popular UCD  
employee in his job. There was universal agreement Fenton has been  
a tireless supporter of the labors of all civic groups to improve  
their community.


Blackwell charged Fenton was being offered resignation with a  
severance package from UCD. She said she had asked to find ways to  
help underwrite his work but had been rebuffed. She said she had  
suggested mediators for the dispute but had been rebuffed.


UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell attended the meeting. He read  
a previously published statement. Fenton, he reiterated, is still  
on paid administrative leave pending the results of an internal  
investigation. In addition, he said, "We are in discussions to  
resolve the matter."


Blackwell repeated her denial that she had involved Fenton or his  
community service team with a political rally for Tom Knox in the  
park. "Everybody knows I supported Tom Knox for Mayor," she said.  
"A couple of weeks before the election, the other candidates began  
releasing their supporters to support Michael Nutter. They didn't  
want Knox to win because he was an outsider. Nutter had no  
constituency of his own."


But the community service team was not involved in the Knox rally,  
she said. Instead, it was engaged in park cleanup and facilitation  
of another event, a fair that was going on in the park.


In this case, the Councilwoman said, her eyes flashing, "John  
Fenton and UCD did what they do. I work with Penn and UCD. But  
somebody decided to lie on him. I'm very disappointed."


Blackwell expressed her view that UCD has been slighting her in  
other ways for some time.


Although First Thursday is not a parliamentary body, Penn's  
Community Relations Director Glenn Bryan ceded the floor to the  
Councilwoman. Community members raised three motions, all of which  
passed with scarcely a dissenting voice. The meeting endorsed John  
Fenton and asked he be retained in his position. It asked that UCD  
policies in general be made public. It supported a community  
meeting to discuss concerns with UCD, that meeting to be organized  
by a committee from among the attendees at the meeting, which  
Sharrieff Ali volunteered to coordinate.


-- Tony West

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's...

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 11:05:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Who  Committeeman7 is, has not. 


What's the relevance? The posting on our little list had nothing to do with  
what happened at the meeting.
 
Al



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bar

[Ross Bender]

On 6/7/07, Mike V. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 We did?




Take it to the Hakka Forum:

http://www.asiawind.com/hakka/forum.htm
--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

RE: [UC] Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bar

[Mike V.]

We did?
 
- Mike V.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 10:04 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Fwd: [UC] Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bar


 OK, I'm game.  You I give credit to for genuinely creative writing.
That, and you are capable of spelling my name correctly, unlike my
buddy.  But the real problem is that the Orientals left town soon after
the Negroes.  Got it?

Sincerely,

pmuyehara



-Original Message-
From: Ross Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: University City listserv 
Sent: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 9:30 pm
Subject: [UC] Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bar


I dropped by the Green Line Mennonite Coffee Shop and Gin Joint this
evening for my customary Vanilla Chai Grande Con Molto Abbraccissimo and
was brought up short by the sight of a friendly familiar-looking green
leaf waving over a display of "Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bars". Fearing that I
was hallucinating again, I wiped my glasses on a Kleenex and peered
closely at the display. Yep, there they were -- "Auntie Ruth's Hemp
Bars" in multiple flavors: mocha java, panama red, thai stick, and
tutti-frutti, two bucks apiece. 

Whoa, I thought, ye olde UC Village gets more and more like Amsterdam
everyday. I picked up one of the mocha java bars and waved it at the
young lady behind the counter with a broad smile.

"No way!" I enthused. 

"Way!" she replied with a wink.

"Sweet!" I countered.

"Sweet!" she replied.

So I sat down at my table on the corner, watching  the Penn bicycle
cops, who would come rushing up to the Failsafe Line in formation, then
screech to a stop, pop some wheelies, and scream north on 43rd Street.
Every now and then they would get tangled up with some hapless UCD
newbie Safety Ambassador, whom the Penn fuzz seem to regard as hopeless
amateurs, and a skirmish would ensue, with the predictable result that
the UCD guy would get left in the dirt with some bent spokes. 

As anybody who's been in this neighborhood more than 20 seconds knows,
that intersection is one of the liveliest in the hood. If it's not the
Penn's Angels and the Ambassadors mixing it up, there are the
Explosively Formed Dudes, or EFD's, raging anarchists who rush out of
the bushes at irregular intervals and whack the bejesus out of the UC
Review box with baseball bats. Sort of a West Philly version of the old
Chinese Fire Drill, although I know Uyehara is gonna cite me for
derogatory orientalist slander for using that phrase. 

Anyhow, the Hemp Bar proved to be a major disappointment. First of all,
it was composed of bird seed pasted together with soybean juice and a
couple of carob chips. Secondly, it didn't do anything. I sat there for
a full half hour and nothing happened. Reminded me of the old Fugs'
song: 

"I waited thirty minutes for my body to sing
 I waited and I waited but I couldn't feel a thing, you know
 I couldn't get high. Oh oh no!
 Don't know why! Oh yeah yeah!"

More in sorrow than in anger, I went back and carefronted the chick at
the counter. 

"Look, I don't know how to say this, but what you advertize as 'hemp
power bars' have absolutely no discernible psychedelic effect. May I
inquire about your refund policy?"

She looked up at me, smiled gently, reached out and stroked my cheek. 

"Brother, you just gotta wait for it to kick in, know what I mean?"

I looked again at her, and this time a faint scent of patchouli wafted
its way toward me. She was staring deep into my eyes, and her eyeballs
were pulsating like a lava lamp. The coffee shop muzak was playing "If
you go to San Francisco, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair..." 

Strobe lights flickered, and the traffic on Baltimore slowed down to a
lazy crawl. 

"Whoa! Duddetttetttette" I stammered.

"Feel the buzz?" she crooned.

Clutching my chai, I staggered back to my table. A yellow submarine
floated tranquilly into the Park, no doubt on its way to the Bowl. Then
a curious convoy made its way east along the Avenue -- three luminescent
green Hummers preceded a whacking great long Penn Transit bus, carrying
all of three passengers, then a Penn Escort minivan, followed by a float
decorated with bright red poppies topped by Amy Gutmann in a bikini
waving enthusiastically to the throng. Then the Penn marching band
playing "Louie, Louie". 

Just then Siano rolled up with a camera glued to his eye.

"Dude!" I exclaimed. "Did you see that? Better yet, did you get that all
on video? Man, this sure beats 15 minutes of the deer in the cemetery!" 

"See what?" he replied.



-- 
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html 
  _  

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at   AOL.com.

RE: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[Bill Sanderson]

Tony - one point of clarity:  You mention the meeting agreeing on three
points.  Was there any response from either Glenn Bryan or Lewis Wendell to
the idea of the forum organized by Sharrief Ali?   I would expect the first
two points to require further internal process, but I wonder if they were
able to agree to participate in the forum?

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 10:02 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

 

Two days after her office had said Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell had no
plans to update the community about the Fenton-Knox affair in Malcolm X Park
at the First Thursday meeting, she showed up promptly and did just that. She
went much farther, angrily baring a serious rift between Univesrsity City
District and her.

 

She delivered petitions with 300 signatures in support of Fenton. The room
at Walnut St. West Library, filled as usual with 70 people, most of them
representatives from more than three dozen agencies and organizations that
are active in West Philadelphia, noisily concurred and made forceful pleas
to retain the popular UCD employee in his job. There was universal agreement
Fenton has been a tireless supporter of the labors of all civic groups to
improve their community.

 

Blackwell charged Fenton was being offered resignation with a severance
package from UCD. She said she had asked to find ways to help underwrite his
work but had been rebuffed. She said she had suggested mediators for the
dispute but had been rebuffed.

 

UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell attended the meeting. He read a
previously published statement. Fenton, he reiterated, is still on paid
administrative leave pending the results of an internal investigation. In
addition, he said, "We are in discussions to resolve the matter."

 

Blackwell repeated her denial that she had involved Fenton or his community
service team with a political rally for Tom Knox in the park. "Everybody
knows I supported Tom Knox for Mayor," she said. "A couple of weeks before
the election, the other candidates began releasing their supporters to
support Michael Nutter. They didn't want Knox to win because he was an
outsider. Nutter had no constituency of his own."

 

But the community service team was not involved in the Knox rally, she said.
Instead, it was engaged in park cleanup and facilitation of another event, a
fair that was going on in the park.

 

In this case, the Councilwoman said, her eyes flashing, "John Fenton and UCD
did what they do. I work with Penn and UCD. But somebody decided to lie on
him. I'm very disappointed."

 

Blackwell expressed her view that UCD has been slighting her in other ways
for some time.

 

Although First Thursday is not a parliamentary body, Penn's Community
Relations Director Glenn Bryan ceded the floor to the Councilwoman.
Community members raised three motions, all of which passed with scarcely a
dissenting voice. The meeting endorsed John Fenton and asked he be retained
in his position. It asked that UCD policies in general be made public. It
supported a community meeting to discuss concerns with UCD, that meeting to
be organized by a committee from among the attendees at the meeting, which
Sharrieff Ali volunteered to coordinate.

 

-- Tony West

 

 

[UC] [Re: Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bar]

[Joe Clarke]

Joe Clarke wrote:
What! No Acapulco Gold?  Seriously, I tried lighting one up and just 
got a lot of molten caramel all over my Frodo Lives tee shirt.


Joe (I hate when that happens) C.

PS: Oh, I didn't know that you were supposed to _eat_ them (duh).

Ross Bender wrote:


I dropped by the Green Line Mennonite Coffee Shop and Gin Joint this 
evening for my customary Vanilla Chai Grande Con Molto Abbraccissimo 
and was brought up short by the sight of a friendly familiar-looking 
green leaf waving over a display of "Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bars". 
Fearing that I was hallucinating again, I wiped my glasses on a 
Kleenex and peered closely at the display. Yep, there they were -- 
"Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bars" in multiple flavors: mocha java, panama 
red, thai stick, and tutti-frutti, two bucks apiece.


Whoa, I thought, ye olde UC Village gets more and more like Amsterdam 
everyday. I picked up one of the mocha java bars and waved it at the 
young lady behind the counter with a broad smile.


"No way!" I enthused.

"Way!" she replied with a wink.

"Sweet!" I countered.

"Sweet!" she replied.

So I sat down at my table on the corner, watching  the Penn bicycle 
cops, who would come rushing up to the Failsafe Line in formation, 
then screech to a stop, pop some wheelies, and scream north on 43rd 
Street. Every now and then they would get tangled up with some 
hapless UCD newbie Safety Ambassador, whom the Penn fuzz seem to 
regard as hopeless amateurs, and a skirmish would ensue, with the 
predictable result that the UCD guy would get left in the dirt with 
some bent spokes.


As anybody who's been in this neighborhood more than 20 seconds 
knows, that intersection is one of the liveliest in the hood. If it's 
not the Penn's Angels and the Ambassadors mixing it up, there are the 
Explosively Formed Dudes, or EFD's, raging anarchists who rush out of 
the bushes at irregular intervals and whack the bejesus out of the UC 
Review box with baseball bats. Sort of a West Philly version of the 
old Chinese Fire Drill, although I know Uyehara is gonna cite me for 
derogatory orientalist slander for using that phrase.


Anyhow, the Hemp Bar proved to be a major disappointment. First of 
all, it was composed of bird seed pasted together with soybean juice 
and a couple of carob chips. Secondly, it didn't do anything. I sat 
there for a full half hour and nothing happened. Reminded me of the 
old Fugs' song:


"I waited thirty minutes for my body to sing
 I waited and I waited but I couldn't feel a thing, you know
 I couldn't get high. Oh oh no!
 Don't know why! Oh yeah yeah!"

More in sorrow than in anger, I went back and carefronted the chick 
at the counter.


"Look, I don't know how to say this, but what you advertize as 'hemp 
power bars' have absolutely no discernible psychedelic effect. May I 
inquire about your refund policy?"


She looked up at me, smiled gently, reached out and stroked my cheek.

"Brother, you just gotta wait for it to kick in, know what I mean?"

I looked again at her, and this time a faint scent of patchouli 
wafted its way toward me. She was staring deep into my eyes, and her 
eyeballs were pulsating like a lava lamp. The coffee shop muzak was 
playing "If you go to San Francisco, be sure to wear some flowers in 
your hair..."


Strobe lights flickered, and the traffic on Baltimore slowed down to 
a lazy crawl.


"Whoa! Duddetttetttette" I stammered.

"Feel the buzz?" she crooned.

Clutching my chai, I staggered back to my table. A yellow submarine 
floated tranquilly into the Park, no doubt on its way to the Bowl. 
Then a curious convoy made its way east along the Avenue -- three 
luminescent green Hummers preceded a whacking great long Penn Transit 
bus, carrying all of three passengers, then a Penn Escort minivan, 
followed by a float decorated with bright red poppies topped by Amy 
Gutmann in a bikini waving enthusiastically to the throng. Then the 
Penn marching band playing "Louie, Louie".


Just then Siano rolled up with a camera glued to his eye.

"Dude!" I exclaimed. "Did you see that? Better yet, did you get that 
all on video? Man, this sure beats 15 minutes of the deer in the 
cemetery!"


"See what?" he replied.


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html 





--- Begin Message ---
What! No Acapulco Gold.  Seriously, I tried lighting one up and just got 
a lot of molten caramel all over my Frodo Lives tee shirt.


Joe (I hate when that happens) C.

PS: Oh, I didn't know that you were supposed to _eat_ them (duh).

Ross Bender wrote:


I dropped by the Green Line Mennonite Coffee Shop and Gin Joint this 
evening for my customary Vanilla Chai Grande Con Molto Abbraccissimo 
and was brought up short by the sight of a friendly familiar-looking 
green leaf waving over a display of "Auntie Ruth's Hemp Bars". Fearing 
that I was hallucinating again, I wiped my glasses on a Kleenex and 
peered closely at the display. Yep, there they were -- "Auntie Ruth's 
Hemp Bars" in multiple fla

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's...

[MLamond]

In a message dated 6/7/07 10:59:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> In a message dated 6/7/2007 10:36:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
>  A question remains about the person who posted about it to our listserv.
> 
> A desperate attempt at diverting attention from the real issue -- namely the 
> apparent discontent with UCD shown at the meeting by just about everyone 
> concerned.
>   
>  Al Krigman
> 
> 
What happened at the meeting has been clearly documented and explained, 
thanks to Tony's post.   

Who Committeeman7 is, has not.   

Do you know the answer, Al?




Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101


**
 See what's free 
at http://www.aol.com.

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's...

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 6/7/2007 10:36:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

A  question remains about the person who posted about it to our  listserv.



A desperate attempt at diverting attention from the real issue -- namely  the 
apparent discontent with UCD shown at the meeting by just about everyone  
concerned.
 
Al Krigman



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[Jim Cummings]

I Googled Committeeman7 and did not find anything.
Jim Cummings

On 6/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Tony, thank you for this thorough and important update.  A question remains
about the person who posted about it to our listserv.

 My guess, now, is that our anonymous poster, Committeeman7, is either
affiliated with the Councilwoman's office or has inside information from the
Councilwoman's office.  Why doesn't the person simply identify him/her/self
and be honest and open with us?  Why operate secretly?  Why didn't Jannie's
office confirm their plans for the first Thursday meeting when Tony called,
if they were collecting signatures and planning to ask for support?  What
were they hiding?  Have they missed all the calls on this list for
transparency and process?

 Melani Lamond


**
 See what's free at http://www.aol.com.



--
Jim Cummings

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

So, who is Committeeman7? [was: Re: [UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job]

[MLamond]

Tony, thank you for this thorough and important update.   A question remains 
about the person who posted about it to our listserv.

My guess, now, is that our anonymous poster, Committeeman7, is either 
affiliated with the Councilwoman's office or has inside information from the 
Councilwoman's office.   Why doesn't the person simply identify him/her/self 
and be 
honest and open with us?   Why operate secretly?   Why didn't Jannie's office 
confirm their plans for the first Thursday meeting when Tony called, if they 
were collecting signatures and planning to ask for support?   What were they 
hiding?   Have they missed all the calls on this list for transparency and 
process?   

Melani Lamond


**
 See what's free at 
http://www.aol.com.

[UC] Blackwell calls to save Fenton's job

[Anthony West]

Two days after her office had said Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell had no plans 
to update the community about the Fenton-Knox affair in Malcolm X Park at the 
First Thursday meeting, she showed up promptly and did just that. She went much 
farther, angrily baring a serious rift between Univesrsity City District and 
her.

She delivered petitions with 300 signatures in support of Fenton. The room at 
Walnut St. West Library, filled as usual with 70 people, most of them 
representatives from more than three dozen agencies and organizations that are 
active in West Philadelphia, noisily concurred and made forceful pleas to 
retain the popular UCD employee in his job. There was universal agreement 
Fenton has been a tireless supporter of the labors of all civic groups to 
improve their community.

Blackwell charged Fenton was being offered resignation with a severance package 
from UCD. She said she had asked to find ways to help underwrite his work but 
had been rebuffed. She said she had suggested mediators for the dispute but had 
been rebuffed.

UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell attended the meeting. He read a previously 
published statement. Fenton, he reiterated, is still on paid administrative 
leave pending the results of an internal investigation. In addition, he said, 
"We are in discussions to resolve the matter."

Blackwell repeated her denial that she had involved Fenton or his community 
service team with a political rally for Tom Knox in the park. "Everybody knows 
I supported Tom Knox for Mayor," she said. "A couple of weeks before the 
election, the other candidates began releasing their supporters to support 
Michael Nutter. They didn't want Knox to win because he was an outsider. Nutter 
had no constituency of his own."

But the community service team was not involved in the Knox rally, she said. 
Instead, it was engaged in park cleanup and facilitation of another event, a 
fair that was going on in the park.

In this case, the Councilwoman said, her eyes flashing, "John Fenton and UCD 
did what they do. I work with Penn and UCD. But somebody decided to lie on him. 
I'm very disappointed."

Blackwell expressed her view that UCD has been slighting her in other ways for 
some time.

Although First Thursday is not a parliamentary body, Penn's Community Relations 
Director Glenn Bryan ceded the floor to the Councilwoman. Community members 
raised three motions, all of which passed with scarcely a dissenting voice. The 
meeting endorsed John Fenton and asked he be retained in his position. It asked 
that UCD policies in general be made public. It supported a community meeting 
to discuss concerns with UCD, that meeting to be organized by a committee from 
among the attendees at the meeting, which Sharrieff Ali volunteered to 
coordinate.

-- Tony West