[UC] Public Record article Community Associations
Something interesting I found in the Public Record article about Special Services Districts. Here are a few quotes showing the element to which I refer (emphasis added): divided neighbors and left community groups in the middle. These services are highly valued by dozens of community groups that regularly tap them to address local needs regularly attended by activists from three dozen West Philadelphia groups and agencies In the middle are most community organizations ... and yet ... They derive their leadership and their sense of mission primarily from local business communities The point that emerges from these quotes, which are central to the article and -- I believe -- to the issue involves the primacy of community groups as opposed to the actual stakeholders in the community. In this article, the stakeholders being businesses of some kind mainly because most of the special services districts in Philadelphia (although not elsewhere in the state or the country) are focused on business issues. And UCD's proposal tried to use this approach, too. By extension, this would apply to residents and other stakeholders in general in a more broad-based NID. This presupposes an intimate connection between the people in an area and the local community group. A connection that I don't believe exists. For a lot of reasons... including the exclusionary attitudes that many community groups exhibit, and a misinterpretation among many activists who cast themselves as community leaders about what the essence of an urban/urbane lifestyle is. Al Krigman Slightly to the right of Jane Jacobs ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Fwd: [UC] Reality check
Dude, If you think my post was a pot shot at you, I'd say you are being a tad self centered. My suggestion was based on the reporting of what happened at the meeting. We know Marty works for Jannie, that Jannie showed up at the meeting apparently intent on raising a fuss about John F and criticizing UCD. The anonymous poster wanted to encourage people interested in the issue to show up. So the question I saw was, who knew in advance that the issue was going to come up, although the agenda was focused elsewhere, and who had an interest in bringing out additional community members who are hyped up on the whole issue? I don't see an alignment between Tony and anti-UCD forces. How would he have the info and how does he gain by getting people to come? What was his motive? How would he gain? Jannie and Marty, OTOH, would benefit, wouldn't they? Does that mean that Marty posted anonymously? Certainly not. Just provides a motive and context. And I don't think you're in a good position to criticize others for trying to interpret events and sharing your interpretations with others. Not at all. Paul -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 8:17 am Subject: Re: [UC] Reality check - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 11:28 PM Subject: Fwd: [UC] Reality check I thought I saw Marty's name on the board list for UCD when I checked earlier this month. I understand he was very present at the first Thursday with Jannie. Seems like he should have been the usual suspect for the committeeman7 message. Right? Paul Hey buddy, You can take pot shots at what I say on the list. But now, you are engaging in this insinuation against people without any support. It was always nutty to accuse a Blackwell associate of that post. Now, you make this type of suggestion. Shame on you. You need to ask the one who brought the report of the fraud, and launched the immediate investigations into voteforandytoy and committeeman 7; how the investigation proceeds. I believe that was Mr. West, if I am not mistaken. Nnelg -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED]; University City List UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 6:25 pm Subject: Re: [UC] Reality check - Original Message - From: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: University City List UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [UC] Reality check KAREN ALLEN wrote: I thought John Fenton was under a gag order. If that's the case, he's not in a position to refute anything. open questions: are the other ucd employees that were involved with the malcolm x park incident also under gag orders? Excellent question! I hope they haven't been placed on a 2 week leave. also, is it true that marty and glenn bryan were removed from ucd's board? when? were any reasons given why? OK. This is what I know. I remember that Marty Cabry was on the UCD Board at the very beginning. Maybe 1999 or 2001? I had heard a long time ago that he had been removed rather than having quit. For me, the Councilmanwoman just confirmed what I had heard a long time ago. What I think I heard on Thurs.? Councilwoman Blackwell suggesting that both he and Glenn Bryan were removed because of the long working relationship with her. I missed when Glenn Bryan was actually on the Board. It's my opinion that she is confirming what I've asserted, a UCD demand for secrecy. A working relationship should have open communication pathways. Whether it's between a civic association and their members, or between a UCD and the community's elected representative; open communication needs to be encouraged. I have no other information, but I think I understand her complaint. Why should she not have a representative on the board with whom she has a working relationship? The community depends on her to get the best information about what is going on, and if her contacts are removed; the open communication is blocked. and, is the full text of wendell's statement available publicly? when he read it at last thursday's meeting, did he just happen to have a copy with him, or had he been planning on reading it? He read it when, I believe both Freda and I, called out, will you confirm or deny what the Councilwoman is telling us. He did not offer any copies of the statement, but read it from a paper. That's what I experienced, Glenn .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[UC] Bat Houses in the City
Here's a link to a project to establish bat houses in London: http://www.bathouseproject.org/ A collaboration between Turner Prize winner Jeremy Deller and partners, the project aims to highlight “the potential for architects, builders, home-owners and conservationists to work together to produce wildlife-friendly building design” and connect “the worlds of art and ecology to encourage public engagement with ecology issues.” And one way of achieving their goal is to sponsor a competition. Entrants are tasked to design “a purpose-built structure that will provide the maximum diversity of specialised features to attract roosting, breeding and hibernating bats, and the possibility for visitors to engage with the bats and learn more about them.” And another point about biodiversity in cities; the devastating effects of _cats_ upon urban bird life: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/mg19426086.400-cats-could-be-scaring-birds-out-of-our-cities.html ARE cats frightening birds so much that they don't breed? Andy Beckerman and colleagues from the University of Sheffield, UK, think fear of cats may explain the ongoing fall in urban bird numbers.Many accusatory fingers point to the cat, and in areas of high cat density, predation may indeed be the sole reason for the decline. It might not be cats' only effect, however. Beckerman's team built a model that took both kills and the fear factor into account, and found that apprehension could explain the decrease even where predation is low. A reduction of just one chick per breeding pair per year per cat can lead to a fall in bird numbers of up to 95 per cent (Animal Conservation, DOI: 10./j.1469-1795.2007.00115.x). You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
It's unclear what Melani/Ucd are doing with this June 8th secret press release and who else is involved. The Public Record reports that Lewis Wendell first provided the latest Fenton information in a public spoken refutation and explanation on June 7th at the public University of Pennsylvania meeting. Read closely: '...She charged Fenton had been dismissed by UCD. Not so, replied UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell, who attended the meeting. Fenton is on paid administrative leave pending the results of the internal investigation. The UCD leadership is reviewing the matter and will determine an appropriate course of action once all the facts are known, he added. The investigation is slow in part because Fenton is not cooperating. 'UCD has made numerous documented attempts to contact John Fenton asking him to respond to the matter under investigation. Our calls and letters have gone unanswered, Wendell explained later.' Not so, replied.. and Wendell explained later Folks, this is reported as supposedly given as a direct and public contradiction to Councilwoman Blackwell's spoken statements on June 7th, not cited from a June 8 press release. But, Wendell never made any thing like such a statement! A large number of people were at the reported meeting. West is not reporting that this information came from a press release after the fact, but was clearly explained by Wendell. Remember in the list posts, West wrote, clearly stated.. West is enclosing part of the non-existent quotes and not other parts. I suspect that is the reason to assert this secret June 8th press release. Little mistakes here? I think not; the intention of the report is clear. Readers are clearly led to believe this spoken exchange occurred! Liz, Matt, Sharrieff, Freda, did anyone of you hear this explanation given by Mr. Wendell last Thursday? Did Mr. Wendell explain that Mr. Fenton was refusing to cooperate with the investigation? Did anyone hear that UCD calls and letters were unanswered? Did anyone hear about numerous documented attempts? Is it in any way believable that all of us whom have reported about the meeting missed this? Did West hear this statement, hold back on clarifying all of our incorrect listserv reports, and now; he reports these very important quotes and clear statements alone? This report is the most unbelievable attack to date upon our elected representative. It is a very very bold lie. Other attendees, please help confirm the meeting statements. There is an announced UC Review report coming next week and the Penn meetings are supposed to have minutes. Thanks, Glenn
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
I already posted, to the best of my much distracted knowledge (it was an agitated political circus), Lewis Wendell's only contribution to the meeting was to read a prepared statement. I thought Lewis acted with remarkable forbearance to an intense degree of attack, some too personal and some way off the track. I felt he could (and perhaps should) have responded to some of the comments and questions that were not directly related to the John Fenton matter, but... it was not a UCD meeting, and Lewis may have been attempting to show some respect for Glenn Bryan's (PENN's) Agenda. Certainly no one else in the room, including myself, was interested in much more than the hijacking the meeting. Lewis Wendell, his lovely wife and beautiful children are our neighbors. They are good neighbors. We should not lose sight of this connectedness as we pursue remedies. Days after the meeting, I bumped into John Fenton at a retail establishment, and he would not discuss the matter, no matter how hard I pried. I forced a brief monolog of my sympathy and support, on him. All he would say was Thank you. Both men continue to behave in ways that lead me to believe they would be better Allies than Enemies. Glenn, I find many of your posts confusing. I am not sure when nuance or sarcasm are in play. I am not sure where they dilute or confuse your message or turn away me (and other readers). Can you keep them simpler? Best! Liz On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:59:39 -0400 Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Its unclear what Melani/Ucd are doing with this June 8th secret press release and who else is involved. The Public Record reports that Lewis Wendell first provided the latest Fenton information in a public spoken refutation and explanation on June 7th at the public University of Pennsylvania meeting. Read closely: '...She charged Fenton had been dismissed by UCD. Not so, replied UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell, who attended the meeting. Fenton is on paid administrative leave pending the results of the internal investigation. The UCD leadership is reviewing the matter and will determine an appropriate course of action once all the facts are known, he added. The investigation is slow in part because Fenton is not cooperating. UCD has made numerous documented attempts to contact John Fenton asking him to respond to the matter under investigation. Our calls and letters have gone unanswered, Wendell explained later. Not so, replied.. and Wendell explained later Folks, this is reported as supposedly given as a direct and public contradiction to Councilwoman Blackwells spoken statements on June 7th, not cited from a June 8 press release. But, Wendell never made any thing like such a statement! A large number of people were at the reported meeting. West is not reporting that this information came from a press release after the fact, but was clearly explained by Wendell. Remember in the list posts, West wrote, clearly stated.. West is enclosing part of the non-existent quotes and not other parts. I suspect that is the reason to assert this secret June 8th press release. Little mistakes here? I think not; the intention of the report is clear. Readers are clearly led to believe this spoken exchange occurred! Liz, Matt, Sharrieff, Freda, did anyone of you hear this explanation given by Mr. Wendell last Thursday? Did Mr. Wendell explain that Mr. Fenton was refusing to cooperate with the investigation? Did anyone hear that UCD calls and letters were unanswered? Did anyone hear about numerous documented attempts? Is it in any way believable that all of us whom have reported about the meeting missed this? Did West hear this statement, hold back on clarifying all of our incorrect listserv reports, and now; he reports these very important quotes and clear statements alone? This report is the most unbelievable attack to date upon our elected representative. It is a very very bold lie. Other attendees, please help confirm the meeting statements. There is an announced UC Review report coming next week and the Penn meetings are supposed to have minutes. Thanks, Glenn 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] Reality check
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 9:03 AM Subject: Fwd: [UC] Reality check Dude, If you think my post was a pot shot at you, I'd say you are being a tad self centered. My suggestion was based on the reporting of what happened at the meeting. We know Marty works for Jannie, that Jannie showed up at the meeting apparently intent on raising a fuss about John F and criticizing UCD. The anonymous poster wanted to encourage people interested in the issue to show up. So the question I saw was, who knew in advance that the issue was going to come up, although the agenda was focused elsewhere, and who had an interest in bringing out additional community members who are hyped up on the whole issue? I don't see an alignment between Tony and anti-UCD forces. How would he have the info and how does he gain by getting people to come? What was his motive? How would he gain? Jannie and Marty, OTOH, would benefit, wouldn't they? Does that mean that Marty posted anonymously? Certainly not. Just provides a motive and context. And I don't think you're in a good position to criticize others for trying to interpret events and sharing your interpretations with others. Not at all. Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting. The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please inform your neighbors. Dude, it's crazy to suggest that this was posted by any Blackwell ally. Obviously, this was posted by someone wishing to discredit Blackwell: UCD's investigation into Councilwoman Blackwell's claim When did this become Blackwell's claim that UCD is investigating? The trickster tells us we will get an update of the UCD investigation into Blackwell not an unannounced Blackwell complaint! A lot of people expected the illegal UCD activity to come up. I never went to the meeting before, and that's why I went. Committeeman 7 had obviously been someone whom had attended these meetings like a civic association leader. That person would have known that the Councilwoman is a regular at that meeting. THIS IS AN APPEAL TO PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO PUT BLACKWELL ON THE HOT SEAT Blackwell revealed an account forcefully without reservation. It is the pro-UCD gang that is engaging in all sorts of tricks, secrets, deliberate lies and attempts to discredit Blackwell. Dude, read this from your committeeman friend's post: UPDATE ON THE UCD'S INVESTIGATION INTO COUNCILWOMAN Get real dude. You just took a pot shot at Mr. Cabry with your insinuation because of your pro UCD leaning. Paul -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 8:17 am Subject: Re: [UC] Reality check - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 11:28 PM Subject: Fwd: [UC] Reality check I thought I saw Marty's name on the board list for UCD when I checked earlier this month. I understand he was very present at the first Thursday with Jannie. Seems like he should have been the usual suspect for the committeeman7 message. Right? Paul Hey buddy, You can take pot shots at what I say on the list. But now, you are engaging in this insinuation against people without any support. It was always nutty to accuse a Blackwell associate of that post. Now, you make this type of suggestion. Shame on you. You need to ask the one who brought the report of the fraud, and launched the immediate investigations into voteforandytoy and committeeman 7; how the investigation proceeds. I believe that was Mr. West, if I am not mistaken. Nnelg -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED]; University City List UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 6:25 pm Subject: Re: [UC] Reality check - Original Message - From: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: University City List UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [UC] Reality check KAREN ALLEN wrote: I thought John Fenton was under a gag order. If that's the case, he's not in a position to refute anything. open questions: are the other ucd employees that were involved with the malcolm x park incident also under gag orders? Excellent question! I hope they haven't been placed on a 2 week leave. also, is it true that marty
RE: [UC] Public Record article Community Associations
I don't think the article gave a fair depiction of what really happened at the First Thursday Meeting. No offense to Tony, just my opinion. It was a combination of multiple statements from community residents at the meeting, 300 signatures on a petition delivered to Jannie Blackwell which she presented at the meeting (not mentioned in the article), along with Councilwoman Blackwell's statements which represented the full indictment of UCD and their polices. If you go back and review some of the first accounts from the news articles, there was a report of the UCD's community service privileges being suspended (we later learn it was by CCD, enter Paul Levy), which triggered the internal investigation by UCD. (not accurately reported in the Record) There was no mention of motions from the floor by residents or any community process being pursued by a committee in the Record article. I believe the Record article didn't properly frame the issue. The issue with UCD is the on-going management and polices of UCD, it just came to a with the John Fenton issue. Folks were upset with UCD and their handling of the Baltimore Avenue corridor. The fact there was a petition of signatures and multiple voices at the First Thursday meeting joined with Councilwoman Blackwell to question the transparency of the UCD government is a more accurate way of framing the debate. So Al, there is a strong community resident component to the complaint and process. S -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 8:25 AM To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] Public Record article Community Associations Something interesting I found in the Public Record article about Special Services Districts. Here are a few quotes showing the element to which I refer (emphasis added): divided neighbors and left community groups in the middle. These services are highly valued by dozens of community groups that regularly tap them to address local needs regularly attended by activists from three dozen West Philadelphia groups and agencies In the middle are most community organizations ... and yet ... They derive their leadership and their sense of mission primarily from local business communities The point that emerges from these quotes, which are central to the article and -- I believe -- to the issue involves the primacy of community groups as opposed to the actual stakeholders in the community. In this article, the stakeholders being businesses of some kind mainly because most of the special services districts in Philadelphia (although not elsewhere in the state or the country) are focused on business issues. And UCD's proposal tried to use this approach, too. By extension, this would apply to residents and other stakeholders in general in a more broad-based NID. This presupposes an intimate connection between the people in an area and the local community group. A connection that I don't believe exists. For a lot of reasons... including the exclusionary attitudes that many community groups exhibit, and a misinterpretation among many activists who cast themselves as community leaders about what the essence of an urban/urbane lifestyle is. Al Krigman Slightly to the right of Jane Jacobs _ See what's free at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000503 .
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
I already posted, to the best of my much distracted knowledge (it was an agitated political circus), Lewis Wendell's only contribution to the meeting was to read a prepared statement. Thanks for your best recollection, it is very confusing because of the misinformation. Liz, please read the Public Record article closely. This published report MAKES CLEAR that Mr. Lewis Wendell gave the report about Mr. Fenton's refusal to cooperate with the investigation in response to Councilwoman Blackewell's verbal account. These are quotes reported as taking place at the meeting. There is no doubt about what is in this published, Public Record, report about events that occurred at this June 7th meeting. It's right there for all to see. Now, Melani has a secret official press release dated June 8th. You confirmed, that to the best of your knowledge, no refutation and explanation was given by Mr. Wendell revealing Mr. Fenton's refusal to cooperate with the investigation. Councilwoman Blackwell clearly told us that Mr. Fenton is not permitted to speak to anyone. This Public Record report asserts that Wendell refuted that aspect of this issue on the spot. These Wendell QUOTES have been said to be, clearly stated, explanations and replies. These false quotes never occurred. This false reporting calls Councilwoman B a liar. This false report of events was about a meeting witnessed by many people. This is a very serious issue. Thanks, Glenn - Original Message - From: Elizabeth F Campion To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 9:50 AM Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? I already posted, to the best of my much distracted knowledge (it was an agitated political circus), Lewis Wendell's only contribution to the meeting was to read a prepared statement. I thought Lewis acted with remarkable forbearance to an intense degree of attack, some too personal and some way off the track. I felt he could (and perhaps should) have responded to some of the comments and questions that were not directly related to the John Fenton matter, but... it was not a UCD meeting, and Lewis may have been attempting to show some respect for Glenn Bryan's (PENN's) Agenda. Certainly no one else in the room, including myself, was interested in much more than the hijacking the meeting. Lewis Wendell, his lovely wife and beautiful children are our neighbors. They are good neighbors. We should not lose sight of this connectedness as we pursue remedies. Days after the meeting, I bumped into John Fenton at a retail establishment, and he would not discuss the matter, no matter how hard I pried. I forced a brief monolog of my sympathy and support, on him. All he would say was Thank you. Both men continue to behave in ways that lead me to believe they would be better Allies than Enemies. Glenn, I find many of your posts confusing. I am not sure when nuance or sarcasm are in play. I am not sure where they dilute or confuse your message or turn away me (and other readers). Can you keep them simpler? Best! Liz On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:59:39 -0400 Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's unclear what Melani/Ucd are doing with this June 8th secret press release and who else is involved. The Public Record reports that Lewis Wendell first provided the latest Fenton information in a public spoken refutation and explanation on June 7th at the public University of Pennsylvania meeting. Read closely: '...She charged Fenton had been dismissed by UCD. Not so, replied UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell, who attended the meeting. Fenton is on paid administrative leave pending the results of the internal investigation. The UCD leadership is reviewing the matter and will determine an appropriate course of action once all the facts are known, he added. The investigation is slow in part because Fenton is not cooperating. 'UCD has made numerous documented attempts to contact John Fenton asking him to respond to the matter under investigation. Our calls and letters have gone unanswered, Wendell explained later.' Not so, replied.. and Wendell explained later Folks, this is reported as supposedly given as a direct and public contradiction to Councilwoman Blackwell's spoken statements on June 7th, not cited from a June 8 press release. But, Wendell never made any thing like such a statement! A large number of people were at the reported meeting. West is not reporting that this information came from a press release after the fact, but was clearly explained by Wendell. Remember in the list posts, West wrote, clearly stated.. West is enclosing part of the non-existent quotes and not other parts. I suspect that is the reason to assert this secret June 8th press release. Little mistakes here? I think not; the intention of the report is clear. Readers are clearly led to believe
Re: [UC] Bat Houses in the City
Paul Uyehara's son built bat houses for his Eagle Project (sposored by UCD) here in UC. He may still have one or two if anyone is interested. Better hurry though, too far into summer and the house won't be occupied until the next spring. On 6/15/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a link to a project to establish bat houses in London: http://www.bathouseproject.org/ A collaboration between Turner Prize winner Jeremy Deller and partners, the project aims to highlight the potential for architects, builders, home-owners and conservationists to work together to produce wildlife-friendly building design and connect the worlds of art and ecology to encourage public engagement with ecology issues. And one way of achieving their goal is to sponsor a competition. Entrants are tasked to design a purpose-built structure that will provide the maximum diversity of specialised features to attract roosting, breeding and hibernating bats, and the possibility for visitors to engage with the bats and learn more about them. And another point about biodiversity in cities; the devastating effects of _cats_ upon urban bird life: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/mg19426086.400-cats-could-be-scaring-birds-out-of-our-cities.html ARE cats frightening birds so much that they don't breed? Andy Beckerman and colleagues from the University of Sheffield, UK, think fear of cats may explain the ongoing fall in urban bird numbers.Many accusatory fingers point to the cat, and in areas of high cat density, predation may indeed be the sole reason for the decline. It might not be cats' only effect, however. Beckerman's team built a model that took both kills and the fear factor into account, and found that apprehension could explain the decrease even where predation is low. A reduction of just one chick per breeding pair per year per cat can lead to a fall in bird numbers of up to 95 per cent (Animal Conservation, DOI: 10./j.1469-1795.2007.00115.x). You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Likely Attempted Break-In
We live on the 800 block of S. 49th, and this morning my husband found the screen of our kitchen window knocked out and laying against the side of the house. Nothing appears to have been taken--perhaps the would-be thief was greeted by our 200-lb. English Mastiff--but scary nonetheless. What's especially infuriating is that the abandoned lot adjacent to our house is, as usual, being completely neglected by the owner and is entirely overgrown with weeds, obscuring several of our windows and making them attractive to burglars. LI was contacted 2 weeks ago, so they should have it all cleared up by, say, October. Sorry for the rant, but wanted to warn everyone. Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mailp=graduation+giftscs=bz You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Pet therapy dog - can anyone help out at the last minute?
The father of a friend of mine just passed away. She is in a wheelchair and has trouble getting around by herself. She is very emotionally distraught right now. She is afraid that she won't be able to make it though the funeral without a therapy dog she can be with. The wake and viewing for her father is tomorrow, Saturday. It will be in Fords, NJ which is close to Edison and Perth Amboy. I have called two pet therapy organization in New Jersey and they are trying to find someone but say that it might be difficult. I know there are a lot of animal lovers on this list. Does anyone know of anyone with a therapy dog who would be able to help out with this situation? Thanks very much. Tina Horowitz
[UC] Street work
I spoke with the contractor who's been ripping up our streets. He said they will be finished with 46th North of Baltimore today and will begin again on 46th South of Baltimore on Monday. He asked that people don't park on 46th South of Baltimore next week. I did not clarify with him whether they are finished with all streets North of Baltimore or just 46th. I also brought up the issue of stapling signs to trees. He said he used to work with an arborist and was told that stapling signs to large trees does not harm the trees but stapling signs to small trees is a problem. Thus he's been having his crew not staple signs to small trees. I pointed out to him that whether he's right or not (I'm no expert so I have no idea), many of the neighbors are upset over the stapling of signs to any sized tree. He understands and said he will ask his crew to not staple signs to any trees. He also pointed out that his contract is to just rip up the street. The city is apparently responsible for the repaving. Thus in the near future we can expect the city to come through, put up new signs, and then pave. Please spread the word about the SOBA stretch of 46th Take care, Doc -- -- University City Yoga http://www.ucyoga.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
I think the article, to the contrary, suggests that Tony obtained the quote about John not cooperating later which would explain why people at the meeting didn't hear it said. The prior reference sounds like it was taken from the statement he read at the meeting. Bigger question, for me, is the inappropriateness of a reporter being involved personally in a story he's covering. I thought that was contrary to journalist's ethics. (Likewise, I thought it odd if the UC Review was going to get involved in running community meetings on UCD.) I'll leave it to the constitutional scholars on the list to wonder about the intersection of free press and free speech rights in the First Amendment. Paul -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Elizabeth F Campion [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:39 am Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? I already posted, to the best of my much distracted knowledge (it was an agitated political circus), Lewis Wendell's only contribution to the meeting was to read a prepared statement. Thanks for your best recollection, it is very confusing because of the misinformation. Liz, please read the Public Record article closely. This published report MAKES CLEAR that Mr. Lewis Wendell gave the report about Mr. Fenton's refusal to cooperate with the investigation in response to Councilwoman Blackewell's verbal account. These are quotes reported as taking place at the meeting. There is no doubt about what is in this published, Public Record, report about events that occurred at this June 7th meeting. It's right there for all to see. Now, Melani has a secret official press release dated June 8th. You confirmed, that to the best of your knowledge, no refutation and explanation was given by Mr. Wendell revealing Mr. Fenton's refusal to cooperate with the investigation. Councilwoman Blackwell clearly told us that Mr. Fenton is not permitted to speak to anyone. This Public Record report asserts that Wendell refuted that aspect of this issue on the spot. These Wendell QUOTES have been said to be, clearly stated, explanations and replies. These false quotes never occurred. This false reporting calls Councilwoman B a liar. This false report of events was about a meeting witnessed by many people. This is a very serious issue. Thanks, Glenn - Original Message - From: Elizabeth F Campion To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 9:50 AM Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? I already posted, to the best of my much distracted knowledge (it was an agitated political circus), Lewis Wendell's only contribution to the meeting was to read a prepared statement. I thought Lewis acted with remarkable forbearance to an intense degree of attack, some too personal and some way off the track. I felt he could (and perhaps should) have responded to some of the comments and questions that were not directly related to the John Fenton matter, but... it was not a UCD meeting, and Lewis may have been attempting to show some respect for Glenn Bryan's (PENN's) Agenda. Certainly no one else in the room, including myself, was interested in much more than the hijacking the meeting. Lewis Wendell, his lovely wife and beautiful children are our neighbors. They are good neighbors. We should not lose sight of this connectedness as we pursue remedies. Days after the meeting, I bumped into John Fenton at a retail establishment, and he would not discuss the matter, no matter how hard I pried. I forced a brief monolog of my sympathy and support, on him. All he would say was Thank you. Both men continue to behave in ways that lead me to believe they would be better Allies than Enemies. Glenn, I find many of your posts confusing. I am not sure when nuance or sarcasm are in play. I am not sure where they dilute or confuse your message or turn away me (and other readers). Can you keep them simpler? Best! Liz On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:59:39 -0400 Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It’s unclear what Melani/Ucd are doing with this June 8th secret press release and who else is involved. The Public Record reports that Lewis Wendell first provided the latest Fenton information in a public spoken refutation and explanation on June 7th at the public University of Pennsylvania meeting. Read closely: '...She charged Fenton had been dismissed by UCD. Not so, replied UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell, who attended the meeting. Fenton is on paid administrative leave pending the results of the internal investigation. The UCD leadership is reviewing the matter and will determine an appropriate course of action once all the facts are known, he added. The investigation is slow in part because Fenton is not cooperating. ‘UCD has made numerous
Fwd: [UC] Street work
I think they did the finish work on at least the first block below Baltimore several days ago, at least the jack hammer part. I saw a contractor staple a sign on a little tree on 4600 Hazel. The big question is, why are they repaving in the first place? If they really wanted to spend money for improvements, how about redoing the sidewalks instead? Paul -Original Message- From: Doc Baldy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: University City listserv univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 1:53 pm Subject: [UC] Street work I spoke with the contractor who's been ripping up our streets. He said they will be finished with 46th North of Baltimore today and will begin again on 46th South of Baltimore on Monday. He asked that people don't park on 46th South of Baltimore next week. I did not clarify with him whether they are finished with all streets North of Baltimore or just 46th. I also brought up the issue of stapling signs to trees. He said he used to work with an arborist and was told that stapling signs to large trees does not harm the trees but stapling signs to small trees is a problem. Thus he's been having his crew not staple signs to small trees. I pointed out to him that whether he's right or not (I'm no expert so I have no idea), many of the neighbors are upset over the stapling of signs to any sized tree. He understands and said he will ask his crew to not staple signs to any trees. He also pointed out that his contract is to just rip up the street. The city is apparently responsible for the repaving. Thus in the near future we can expect the city to come through, put up new signs, and then pave. Please spread the word about the SOBA stretch of 46th Take care, Doc -- -- University City Yoga http://www.ucyoga.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. =0 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Street work
why are they repaving in the first place? Great question. I didn't think the contractor was the appropriate party to ask so I stuck with stapling signs to trees with him... Take care, DB On 6/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think they did the finish work on at least the first block below Baltimore several days ago, at least the jack hammer part. I saw a contractor staple a sign on a little tree on 4600 Hazel. The big question is, why are they repaving in the first place? If they really wanted to spend money for improvements, how about redoing the sidewalks instead? Paul -Original Message- From: Doc Baldy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: University City listserv univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 1:53 pm Subject: [UC] Street work I spoke with the contractor who's been ripping up our streets. He said they will be finished with 46th North of Baltimore today and will begin again on 46th South of Baltimore on Monday. He asked that people don't park on 46th South of Baltimore next week. I did not clarify with him whether they are finished with all streets North of Baltimore or just 46th. I also brought up the issue of stapling signs to trees. He said he used to work with an arborist and was told that stapling signs to large trees does not harm the trees but stapling signs to small trees is a problem. Thus he's been having his crew not staple signs to small trees. I pointed out to him that whether he's right or not (I'm no expert so I have no idea), many of the neighbors are upset over the stapling of signs to any sized tree. He understands and said he will ask his crew to not staple signs to any trees. He also pointed out that his contract is to just rip up the street. The city is apparently responsible for the repaving. Thus in the near future we can expect the city to come through, put up new signs, and then pave. Please spread the word about the SOBA stretch of 46th Take care, Doc -- -- University City Yoga http://www.ucyoga.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. =0 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. -- -- University City Yoga http://www.ucyoga.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
I think the article, to the contrary, suggests that Tony obtained the quote about John not cooperating later which would explain why people at the meeting didn't hear it said. Didn't Tony also get Liz's quote later? Isn't it common for journalists to question speakers after a meeting to get clarification and comments? It seems to me that what's important is that more information has been released in an effort to clarify the situation. Unfortunately that information seems to be getting lost in the continued dissection of exactly how the information came to light. Cheers, Baldy Doc On 6/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think the article, to the contrary, suggests that Tony obtained the quote about John not cooperating later which would explain why people at the meeting didn't hear it said. The prior reference sounds like it was taken from the statement he read at the meeting. Bigger question, for me, is the inappropriateness of a reporter being involved personally in a story he's covering. I thought that was contrary to journalist's ethics. (Likewise, I thought it odd if the UC Review was going to get involved in running community meetings on UCD.) I'll leave it to the constitutional scholars on the list to wonder about the intersection of free press and free speech rights in the First Amendment. Paul -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Elizabeth F Campion [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:39 am Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? I already posted, to the best of my much distracted knowledge (it was an agitated political circus), Lewis Wendell's only contribution to the meeting was to read a prepared statement. Thanks foryour best recollection, it isvery confusing because of the misinformation. Liz, please read the Public Record article closely. This published reportMAKES CLEARthat Mr. Lewis Wendell gave the report about Mr. Fenton's refusal to cooperate with the investigation in response to Councilwoman Blackewell's verbal account.These are quotes reportedas taking place atthe meeting. There is no doubt aboutwhat is in thispublished, Public Record,report about events that occurred at this June 7th meeting. It's right there for all to see. Now, Melani has a secret official press release dated June 8th. You confirmed, that to the best of your knowledge, no refutation and explanationwas given by Mr. Wendellrevealing Mr. Fenton's refusal to cooperate with the investigation. Councilwoman Blackwell clearly told us that Mr. Fenton is not permitted to speak to anyone. This Public Record report asserts that Wendell refuted that aspect of this issue on the spot. These WendellQUOTES have been said to be, clearly stated, explanations and replies. These false quotes never occurred. This false reporting calls Councilwoman B a liar. This false report of events was about a meeting witnessed by many people. This is a very serious issue. Thanks, Glenn - Original Message - From: Elizabeth F Campion To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 9:50 AM Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? I already posted, to the best of my much distracted knowledge (it was an agitated political circus), Lewis Wendell's only contribution to the meeting was to read a prepared statement. I thought Lewis acted with remarkable forbearance to an intense degree of attack, some too personal and some way off the track. I felt he could (and perhaps should) have responded to some of the comments and questions that were notdirectly related tothe John Fenton matter, but... it was not a UCD meeting, andLewis may have been attempting to show some respect for Glenn Bryan's (PENN's) Agenda. Certainly no one else in the room, including myself, was interested in much more than the hijacking the meeting. Lewis Wendell, his lovely wife and beautiful children are our neighbors. They are good neighbors. We should not lose sight of this connectedness as we pursue remedies. Days after the meeting, I bumped into John Fentonat a retail establishment, and he would not discuss the matter, no matter how hard I pried. Iforced a briefmonolog of my sympathy and support, on him. All he would say was Thank you. Both men continue to behave in ways that lead me to believe they would be better Allies than Enemies. Glenn, I find many of your posts confusing. I am not sure whennuance or sarcasm are in play. I am not sure where they dilute or confuse your message or turn away me (and other readers). Can you keep them simpler? Best! Liz On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:59:39 -0400 Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's unclear what Melani/Ucd are doing with this June 8th secret press release and who else is involved.The Public Recordreports that Lewis Wendell first provided the latest Fenton information in a public spokenrefutation and explanation on
Re: [UC] Street work
Dear Neighbors: Recently they did the same work on 43rd Street between Woodland and Baltimore. As a word of warning they were there at 6am the first morning and started to tow cars. They only towed the cars to nearby streets not to a pound and the cars were not ticketed. However some of the spots they put cars in were not legal parking places and the PPA may have ticketed them later. Regards Denise From: Doc Baldy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2007/06/15 Fri PM 12:53:43 CDT To: University City listserv univcity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] Street work I spoke with the contractor who's been ripping up our streets. He said they will be finished with 46th North of Baltimore today and will begin again on 46th South of Baltimore on Monday. He asked that people don't park on 46th South of Baltimore next week. I did not clarify with him whether they are finished with all streets North of Baltimore or just 46th. I also brought up the issue of stapling signs to trees. He said he used to work with an arborist and was told that stapling signs to large trees does not harm the trees but stapling signs to small trees is a problem. Thus he's been having his crew not staple signs to small trees. I pointed out to him that whether he's right or not (I'm no expert so I have no idea), many of the neighbors are upset over the stapling of signs to any sized tree. He understands and said he will ask his crew to not staple signs to any trees. He also pointed out that his contract is to just rip up the street. The city is apparently responsible for the repaving. Thus in the near future we can expect the city to come through, put up new signs, and then pave. Please spread the word about the SOBA stretch of 46th Take care, Doc -- -- University City Yoga http://www.ucyoga.com You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Siding contractor?
Liz, thanks for the tip. I went and checked it out and talked with Ed. It does look great, and am also happy to find a well regarded roofer, Russel Roofing. Cheers, Michael Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:09:00 -0400 From: Elizabeth F Campion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] Siding contractor? Check out the BEAUTIFUL work being completed at 4607 Springfield. The fish scale siding on the bay is stunning, and the fresh cut Cedar smells fabulous to me and not so fabulous to annoying insects. The owner, Ed, is as pleased as punch and seems happy to reward good and talented work by passing along names and contact info. Ed is not on the list, so I will blind copy him with your contact address. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Meanwhile, I am headed back to work, suffering from Roof Envy. RUSSELL ROOFING did the roof, and there signs are still up. I think the painting is being done by FINE PAINTERS. But I can not remember the names of the wood workers who did the siding. All the contractors were as courteous, clean and considerate as such huge work permits. And I love living next to such beautiful improvements. Best! Liz You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bigger question, for me, is the inappropriateness of a reporter being involved personally in a story he's covering. the ucd/malcolm x park incident of may 11-12 wasn't mentioned in the philly public record prior to tony's june 14 story, was it? .. 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 http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
In a message dated 6/15/2007 3:44:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It seems to me that what's important is that more information has been released in an effort to clarify the situation. Unfortunately that information seems to be getting lost in the continued dissection of exactly how the information came to light. Cheers, Baldy Doc I think this is a very important point. Folks on this list were very eager for more information, an update, an explanation for the delay. The June 8th second press release is informative. Instead of anyone reacting to the reason for the delay, several folks are now reacting to the press release delivery. Glenn called it a secret press release. How, when it has been released to the entire list, can it be called secret? You all have it now - does anyone have any constructive ideas for next steps? Next steps for John Fenton, the UCD, the Councilwoman, Glenn Bryan, Sharrieff's planning group, the Weekly Press, or the list? Melani Lamond ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
Doc Baldy wrote: Didn't Tony also get Liz's quote later? Isn't it common for journalists to question speakers after a meeting to get clarification and comments? It seems to me that what's important is that more information has been released in an effort to clarify the situation. Unfortunately that information seems to be getting lost in the continued dissection of exactly how the information came to light. did either liz or melani know they would be quoted in an article about blackwell when they spoke with tony? did either of them know of ucd's 2nd press release when they spoke with tony? do either liz or melani agree with being portrayed in the article as the polar ends of the 'controversies' over ucd? will liz's clarification ever appear in philly public record (online)? blah blah etc. etc. good thing we can get feedback, right here online! .. 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 http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
No. Not newsworthy enough, from our perspective. -- Tony West the ucd/malcolm x park incident of may 11-12 wasn't mentioned in the philly public record prior to tony's june 14 story, was it? [aka ray] You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
To answer: did either liz or melani know they would be quoted in an article about blackwell when they spoke with tony? Yes. did either of them know of ucd's 2nd press release when they spoke with tony? I don't know. do either liz or melani agree with being portrayed in the article as the polar ends of the 'controversies' over ucd? I made it clear I was seeking a supporter of Blackwell's position and a defender of UCD. will liz's clarification ever appear in philly public record (online)? blah blah etc. etc. No. Publisher's deep love of trees, etc., plus intention to move on to next story. You can, however, purchase advertising space to carry their clarification if you wish. That will overcome publisher's environmentalist sentiments. $16/column inch. good thing we can get feedback, right here online! As long as the feeder-backer feels like it. [aka ray] -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
RE: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
Melani: I have announced our plans for the community planning committee, and public forums, please don't call it Sharrieff's Group. I think the plans are constructive and already have multiple voices and opinions attached. The idea of a planning committee and public process was voted on by everyone in the room at the First Thursday meeting (approximately 60 people), 20 people signed up to get involved, all from a motion from the floor being presided over by Councilwoman Blackwell. The purpose of the committee and the forums are to allow everyone to have their opinions heard and debated and to do so in a forum which is off-line and accessible to most people and their schedules. Again, bring your comments to the committee or forums. John Fenton will have our support no matter what, but we may not be able to impact his circumstances in a way which will both satisfy him and what may be the popular desires of those of us who have become accustomed to his support and services through UCD. The real question remains: How did UCD allow themselves to jeopardize their only solid relationship with community stakeholders and simultaneously bring pounds of scrutiny upon their agency and management? The fact is, Lewis Wendell as Director of the UCD is responsible for this mess with John which could have been avoided regardless of any questions raised about the appropriateness of contact with political figures, there was much more at stake for our community, namely John Fenton. If Lewis didn't realize the reaction their decisions would achieve, I would then say he is completely out of touch. I believe the disregarding of the level of affection we all have for John Fenton by UCD is at the core of the public outrage and also a large reason John is now unable or willing to respond to the UCD. The UCD is responsible for their polices and actions in our community and there is no place to hide. When is enough..enough? ..and what are you prepared to do about it? S -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 5:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? In a message dated 6/15/2007 3:44:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It seems to me that what's important is that more information has been released in an effort to clarify the situation. Unfortunately that information seems to be getting lost in the continued dissection of exactly how the information came to light. Cheers, Baldy Doc I think this is a very important point. Folks on this list were very eager for more information, an update, an explanation for the delay. The June 8th second press release is informative. Instead of anyone reacting to the reason for the delay, several folks are now reacting to the press release delivery. Glenn called it a secret press release. How, when it has been released to the entire list, can it be called secret? You all have it now - does anyone have any constructive ideas for next steps? Next steps for John Fenton, the UCD, the Councilwoman, Glenn Bryan, Sharrieff's planning group, the Weekly Press, or the list? Melani Lamond _ See what's free at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000503 .
RE: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
Melani: I have announced our plans for the community planning committee, and public forums, please don't call it Sharrieff's Group. I think the plans are constructive and already have multiple voices and opinions attached. The idea of a planning committee and public process was voted on by everyone in the room at the First Thursday meeting (approximately 60 people), 20 people signed up to get involved, all from a motion from the floor being presided over by Councilwoman Blackwell. The purpose of the committee and the forums are to allow everyone to have their opinions heard and debated and to do so in a forum which is off-line and accessible to most people and their schedules. Again, bring your comments to the committee or forums. John Fenton will have our support no matter what, but we may not be able to impact his circumstances in a way which will both satisfy him and what may be the popular desires of those of us who have become accustomed to his support and services through UCD. The real question remains: How did UCD allow themselves to jeopardize their only solid relationship with community stakeholders and simultaneously bring pounds of scrutiny upon their agency and management? The fact is, Lewis Wendell as Director of the UCD is responsible for this mess with John which could have been avoided regardless of any questions raised about the appropriateness of contact with political figures, there was much more at stake for our community, namely John Fenton. If Lewis didn't realize the reaction their decisions would achieve, I would then say he is completely out of touch. I believe the disregarding of the level of affection we all have for John Fenton by UCD is at the core of the public outrage and also a large reason John is now unable or willing to respond to the UCD. The UCD is responsible for their polices and actions in our community and there is no place to hide. When is enough..enough? ..and what are you prepared to do about it? S -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 5:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? In a message dated 6/15/2007 3:44:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It seems to me that what's important is that more information has been released in an effort to clarify the situation. Unfortunately that information seems to be getting lost in the continued dissection of exactly how the information came to light. Cheers, Baldy Doc I think this is a very important point. Folks on this list were very eager for more information, an update, an explanation for the delay. The June 8th second press release is informative. Instead of anyone reacting to the reason for the delay, several folks are now reacting to the press release delivery. Glenn called it a secret press release. How, when it has been released to the entire list, can it be called secret? You all have it now - does anyone have any constructive ideas for next steps? Next steps for John Fenton, the UCD, the Councilwoman, Glenn Bryan, Sharrieff's planning group, the Weekly Press, or the list? Melani Lamond _ See what's free at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000503 .
Re: [UC] Public Record article Community Associations
What made this story matter to citywide readers was the involvement of Councilwoman Blackwell, and that was the focus of the article. Other articles, with other foci, could validly have focused on other details. While First Thursday is always open to anyone, it is explicitly designed to further information flow between Penn and agencies and groups that are active in West Philadelphia. More than 90% of its attendees are affiliated with a wide variety of community-outreach workers. That's why Blackwell chose to be there, why Wendell chose to be there and why Bryan set it up that way. By definition, the attendees all work in West Philadelphia and many of them are also residents. That's whom you're always going to get at a First Thursday meeting: affiliated activists, for the most part. This fact should not belittle the role of those unaffiliated activists who did show, although most of them did have a personal history of group leadership as well. With all respect to Al's views, politicians citywide do not make the same strong distinction between community groups and residents that he does. In general -- as a class -- they are treated as important means of communicating with ordinary residents, not as forces opposed to ordinary residents. I see no possibility that will change in the foreseeable future. So the article of necessity, to be truthful, focused on how affiliated activists in particular perceived the issue. It did, however, feature one non-affiliated resident very prominently, placing her on Page One. -- Tony West - Original Message - From: S. Sharrieff Ali I don't think the article gave a fair depiction of what really happened at the First Thursday Meeting. It was a combination of multiple statements from community residents at the meeting, 300 signatures on a petition delivered to Jannie Blackwell which she presented at the meeting (not mentioned in the article), along with Councilwoman Blackwell's statements which represented the full indictment of UCD and their polices. I believe the Record article didn't properly frame the issue. The issue with UCD is the on-going management and polices of UCD, it just came to a with the John Fenton issue. Folks were upset with UCD and their handling of the Baltimore Avenue corridor. The fact there was a petition of signatures and multiple voices at the First Thursday meeting joined with Councilwoman Blackwell to question the transparency of the UCD government is a more accurate way of framing the debate. So Al, there is a strong community resident component to the complaint and process.
Re: [UC] Notes from Planning Committee Meeting Re: UCD 6-13-07
Thanks for the tip. I know things like this are doable. But (a) I'm trying to lose this ISP eventually, (b) I dislike using work time for non-job-related stuff, and (c) I really don't like learning new computer routines all the time. I am the kind of guy who likes to jump in his car and speed off, not the kind who likes to stick his head under the hood and fiddle with the components. That's why I rely on and admire IT types like you. I get pounded with emails all day at work, and you see some odd damn things going on in the world of news. Perhaps that's because news events, by their definition, are always just happening, so they never have time to get much practise at the art of existing. Speaking of which, I'm off to one now. -- Tony West thanks! al wrote that you were offline, that's what seemed odd. would something like this help you in future? to post to uclist no matter where you're using a computer?: http://webmail.dca.net/ thanks. but you can appreciate how odd it is when a news story containing a quoted press release is posted onlist, and someone else posts that very same press release an hour later onlist with the explanation that it doesn't seem to have been picked up by the media! BIZZARO DAY IS JUNE 14 [aka ray] You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
Dear Ray, While my conversation with Tony was an unscheduled convergence of neighbors at the busy intersection of 43rd and Baltimore, I know him as a writer and editor. As a grownup, I was forewarned and chatted anyway. I enjoyed talking with Tony. He told me he might put some of my ideas into an article he was writing. Ultimately isn't all publicity good publicity? (I write it with a grain of salt.) I am forthright, and usually say what I mean. If I were to be embarrassed by my choices I would probably work toward change (in either my behavior or associates). I was not aware of the 2nd Press release when I spoke with Tony. He may not have been aware of it either. I like Tony, I like Ray and I think Ray and Tony are even more polarized than Melani and I. Can't we all just get along? (In my case, by keeping a healthy distance from the 'nails on a chalkboard' sensory overload, I experience near Ms. Lamond.) ;-) Liz On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:25:27 -0400 UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Doc Baldy wrote: Didn't Tony also get Liz's quote later? Isn't it common for journalists to question speakers after a meeting to get clarification and comments? It seems to me that what's important is that more information has been released in an effort to clarify the situation. Unfortunately that information seems to be getting lost in the continued dissection of exactly how the information came to light. did either liz or melani know they would be quoted in an article about blackwell when they spoke with tony? did either of them know of ucd's 2nd press release when they spoke with tony? do either liz or melani agree with being portrayed in the article as the polar ends of the 'controversies' over ucd? will liz's clarification ever appear in philly public record (online)? blah blah etc. etc. good thing we can get feedback, right here online! .. 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 http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
On 6/15/07, Elizabeth F Campion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Ray, While my conversation with Tony was an unscheduled convergence of neighbors at the busy intersection of 43rd and Baltimore, I know him as a writer and editor. As a grownup, I was forewarned and chatted anyway. Just as my good friend Angelina Jolie always does, before I *ever* agree to talk to a reporter I make them sign a statement promising that they will only interview me about my latest movie and WILL NOT ask any questions about my personal life. The agreement stipulates that if they get off track and wanna know what deodorant I use, or if I could be a tree, what tree would I be, or what is my favorite color, I am entitled simply to clam up and walk away. Some paranoid dingbats who shall remain nameless, although many of them are employed by Faux News, see this as an infringement of their First Amendment rights. To them I simply respond: Get stuffed, chuckleheads. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org
RE: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
I am posting this response publicly although it is in response to a few off-list post. Generally the question is : Why is Lewis Wendell more responsible? Well..the answer is if it was a Board decision to suspend John then I guess we would have all known about it from the meeting held by our community representatives on the UCD Board. S
[UC] The Mennobird Song
The Mennobird Song Darling wittle Mennobird, Tweeting in the tree, There he sings his holy word, Oh please, please, look at me. Sadly wittle Mennobird, He sings of things so far, Tweeting loud and funny turds, Like the doofus at the bar. Stuffed by, Chucklehead PS: I offer this children's poem to the public domain so that Cassidy may read it at the upscale poetry smackdown.
[UC] unsubscribe
Not sure how to do this, but if you can, please unsubscribe me. Thanks, VTN aka Vivianne You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
??? I may not have been clear.? It's not about other people being personally involved, its about one person being personally involved, who happens to be a reporter - Tony.? The others were not writing newspaper articles.? Tony is totally involved in the UCD issue, at least in the list world.? His interest and bias were not disclosed in the newspaper.? ??? I'm generally a UCD supporter, I admit it.? But c'mon, the article is hard to classify as neutral.? Paul -Original Message- From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 2:51 pm Subject: Re: Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:? I think the article, to the contrary, suggests that Tony obtained the quote about John not cooperating later which would explain why people at the meeting didn't hear it said. The prior reference sounds like it was taken from the statement he read at the meeting.? ? Bigger question, for me, is the inappropriateness of a reporter being involved personally in a story he's covering. I thought that was contrary to journalist's ethics. (Likewise, I thought it odd if the UC Review was going to get involved in running community meetings on UCD.) I'll leave it to the constitutional scholars on the list to wonder about the intersection of free press and free speech rights in the First Amendment.? There's nothing inappropriate about it, actually-- so long as the reporter's interest and biases are known and the reporting is accurate. Then there's the matter of how personally involved one is. Blackwell, Fenton, Lewis Wendell, and some employees of UCD are, verifiably, personally involved. Tony's role as a board member of the FoCP puts him on the outer periphery of involved, which isn't much more involved than any other resident of UCD. And it doesn't seem to have influenced his reporting in any substantive way;? ? ? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the? list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see? http://www.purple.com/list.html.? AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
RE: [UC] Not about Marty
committeeman7. IS..Kaiser Soeze -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 10:59 PM To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] Not about Marty Neighbors, In a couple of posts, I have surmised that Marty may be Committeeman7. Since it may not have been apparent in the posts, I want to clarify that I had no reason to think that Marty actually was the poster. I meant to suggest that it made sense that someone allied with Jannie would have reason to draw more readers to the meeting, and that made more sense to me than the original suggestion that Tony, as a supposed UCD supporter, would have had reason to promote the meeting and knowledge that UCD would be the center of the meeting. My understanding was that Marty was on the list, is a committeeman, is connected to the Councilwoman, and was with her at the meeting. I may well have been wrong about one or more of those suppositions. Even if I wasn't wrong about that, I should have made it clear that I had no reason to think that Marty himself, as opposed to anyone connected with Jannie, was in fact involved. So please whenever I said Marty, let's change that to someone aligned with Jannie (or SAJ). That's all that I meant to suggest. If Marty is on the list, or people tell him about the list, my apology for throwing your name around. I still think SAJ is a better candidate for committeeman7 than Tony, and I don't think there was anything bad about his/her post other than being anonymous. Nevertheless, my bad. Paul _ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000437 AOL.com.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
This is a fair question. At my company, we take news wherever we find it. We can't afford to turn good stories away just because somebody already knows somebody. We make our living by knowing people. A larger company like PNH might apply rules like what you're proposing, though. Even there, though, there is more flexibility than you might think. Reporters get story ideas based on their own real-life involvements all the time; they just write them out of the story (as I did). You won't find out about those connections unless you're chatting with the writer. I also think the smaller the social scale of a news story, the fuzzier these lines become. University City is too small a world to sustain a large pool of writers about community issues who are paid full-time to just study them and report on them. In a small world, people who know about things and people who do things often are one and the same. -- Tony West Bigger question, for me, is the inappropriateness of a reporter being involved personally in a story he's covering. I thought that was contrary to journalist's ethics. (Likewise, I thought it odd if the UC Review was going to get involved in running community meetings on UCD.) I'll leave it to the constitutional scholars on the list to wonder about the intersection of free press and free speech rights in the First Amendment. Paul You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bigger question, for me, is the inappropriateness of a reporter being involved personally in a story he's covering. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN asked: the ucd/malcolm x park incident of may 11-12 wasn't mentioned in the philly public record prior to tony's june 14 story, was it? Anthony West wrote: No. Not newsworthy enough, from our perspective. thanks. that helps clarify what I was asking paul about: now that we know the article you wrote was the first mention you or your paper made about the ucd incident since it happened a month ago (rather than an ongoing story you or your paper were covering), paul's question becomes one about the appropriateness of yourself, as a reporter, being personally involved in the article you wrote. (for example, was your involvement with uclist over this incident as a reporter? as focp board member?) [do I have that right, paul?] and the question becomes more interesting, when we consider what you mean by 'newsworthy': in your article, was the news of the ucd incident a pretext for your writing about special service districts, or was writing about special service districts a pretext for your presenting, as a publicist, ucd's 2nd press release about the ucd incident? or--? .. 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 http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Not about Marty
ROFL Bravo. :-) On 6/15/07 11:25 PM, S. Sharrieff Ali [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: committeeman7 IS.Kaiser Soeze -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 10:59 PM To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] Not about Marty Neighbors, In a couple of posts, I have surmised that Marty may be Committeeman7. Since it may not have been apparent in the posts, I want to clarify that I had no reason to think that Marty actually was the poster. I meant to suggest that it made sense that someone allied with Jannie would have reason to draw more readers to the meeting, and that made more sense to me than the original suggestion that Tony, as a supposed UCD supporter, would have had reason to promote the meeting and knowledge that UCD would be the center of the meeting. My understanding was that Marty was on the list, is a committeeman, is connected to the Councilwoman, and was with her at the meeting. I may well have been wrong about one or more of those suppositions. Even if I wasn't wrong about that, I should have made it clear that I had no reason to think that Marty himself, as opposed to anyone connected with Jannie, was in fact involved. So please whenever I said Marty, let's change that to someone aligned with Jannie (or SAJ). That's all that I meant to suggest. If Marty is on the list, or people tell him about the list, my apology for throwing your name around. I still think SAJ is a better candidate for committeeman7 than Tony, and I don't think there was anything bad about his/her post other than being anonymous. Nevertheless, my bad. Paul AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000437 .
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
Anthony West wrote: To answer: will liz's clarification ever appear in philly public record (online)? blah blah etc. etc. No. Publisher's deep love of trees, etc., plus intention to move on to next story. You can, however, purchase advertising space to carry their clarification if you wish. That will overcome publisher's environmentalist sentiments. $16/column inch. really? see, I was asking about philly public record (online). how do trees and column inches figure into it? have you seen this page: http://www.phillyrecord.com/2007/0614/letters.html liz's clarifications could easily appear there, no trees would be destroyed: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] like I say: good thing we can get feedback, right here online! As long as the feeder-backer feels like it. [true, and that's feedback, too! ;-)] .. 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 http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
I gotta disagree with you on this one, Ray. The question becomes less interesting. -- Tony West and the question becomes more interesting, when we consider what you mean by 'newsworthy': in your article, was the news of the ucd incident a pretext for your writing about special service districts, or was writing about special service districts a pretext for your presenting, as a publicist, ucd's 2nd press release about the ucd incident? or--? [aka ray] You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
Ray, My company would be delighted to discuss with your company the sorts of services we could provide each other for free. You, as representative of the University of Pennsylvania, and I, as representative of the Philadelphia Public Record, together could forge a new era of cooperation and partnership between our two institutions, which together can do so much to encapsulate the civic vision of University City and the Delaware Valley region as a whole. Until we have concluded those discussions, however, anything you want to say in the Public Record in the form of a paid advertisement you may have, at the rate of $16 / column inch. We do not sell on-line ads separately from newsprint ads. If you want the on-line ad, there's a $2 service charge on top of your newsprint ad. Sorry, those are our rules. If you want us to create special on-line posting services for you for a fee, discuss them with me off-line. If you wish to tell the editor how to edit his paper, I will be glad to offer you one free hour during which you, Ray Rorke, can edit my publication. Yes, you are the lucky winner! Only one condition: first, I get to come to your office and muck around with all its computers for one free hour. No fair making backups, either! -- Tony West - Original Message - From: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: University City List UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 12:01 AM Subject: Re: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement? Anthony West wrote: To answer: will liz's clarification ever appear in philly public record (online)? blah blah etc. etc. No. Publisher's deep love of trees, etc., plus intention to move on to next story. You can, however, purchase advertising space to carry their clarification if you wish. That will overcome publisher's environmentalist sentiments. $16/column inch. really? see, I was asking about philly public record (online). how do trees and column inches figure into it? have you seen this page: http://www.phillyrecord.com/2007/0614/letters.html liz's clarifications could easily appear there, no trees would be destroyed: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] like I say: good thing we can get feedback, right here online! As long as the feeder-backer feels like it. [true, and that's feedback, too! ;-)] .. 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 http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: Fwd: [UC] Press release or Wendell statement?
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN wrote: and the question becomes more interesting, when we consider what you mean by 'newsworthy': in your article, was the news of the ucd incident a pretext for your writing about special service districts, or was writing about special service districts a pretext for your presenting, as a publicist, ucd's 2nd press release about the ucd incident? or--? Anthony West wrote: I gotta disagree with you on this one, Ray. The question becomes less interesting. see, now you've gone and made it even more interesting! ;-) .. 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 http://www.purple.com/list.html.
