[UC] L I question
Hello all, I am trying to find the L I regulation for placement and reach of a toilet standpipe. I've been to phila.gov and downloaded both the plumbing code and the building code. I can't seem to find what I am looking for. Can anyone help? Offline would be fine. Thanks, Margie 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] Crime Spree
FYI: Early this morning around 6 AM 6/26, on the 4700 block of Warrington Ave, 5 cars parked on the southside of the street were broken into, here we go again. The police were called and they responded. J. Valentino ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[UC] Proof that gentrification has run amok in the hood
It's come to this -- people are reserving parking spaces by tying $800 Herman Miller Aeron chairs to trash cans and leaving them in the street: http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/aeron.jpg Pardon me, but would you have any Grey Poupon? Kc 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] Proof that gentrification has run amok in the hood
Speaking of gentrification, there was a hilarious article about it in the latest Onion: Shitty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/shitty_neighborhood_rallies Enjoy! On 6/26/07, Kyle Cassidy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's come to this -- people are reserving parking spaces by tying $800 Herman Miller Aeron chairs to trash cans and leaving them in the street: http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/aeron.jpg Pardon me, but would you have any Grey Poupon? Kc 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. -- Joshua Karstendick 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] UCD Related
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 6/25/2007 3:57:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes (to Sali): Currently, the folks on the Board are footing the majority of the bill for clean and safe efforts in wide areas of University City. Do you think they'll keep doing that Wouldn't it depend on the extent to which the various parties are being honest about their intentions and agendas, and the corresponding goals for what a Special Services District (SSD) might be constituted to achieve, whether there's a real partnership between Penn (and the other institutions) and the community, the degree to which a NID might get back on the table after an appropriate SSD proved itself competent to be the NIDMA, and factors like that. Personally, I'd like to see an SSD emerge that got back to the basics of clean and safe and dropped the marketing, development, and social engineering roles that made the UCD so popular with the few anointed and unpopular with the many benighted, and also operated in a transparent manner -- both functionally and fiscally -- so that people either had confidence that the organization knew what people really wanted and understood the value of a dollar that most people have to work to earn, or their deficiencies in this area were obvious enough that they be shown the door. The above at the policy level, perhaps subject to open deliberations and stakeholder input (and not at the dog-and-pony forums with agendas framed by Harris-squared), long before the selection of a new Executive Director. This way, a person could be recruited -- perhaps locally, perhaps globally -- with a track record in implementing the newly redefined policies and in adapting to rather than trying to reshape the situation on the ground. I generally agree with Al here, because he does understand what an SSD and an NID would have to accomplish-- even _before_ it got started. The big issue is simply getting money. A community can organize an SSD or NID with the best of intentions and community support. But if it can't _show_ that it can deliver on the services, it's not going to get any money from any big donors, which are needed to prime the pump, so to speak. Which means it's not going to attract a lot of community-derived financial support, either. Al and I would probably disagree on what constitutes 'the basics' and social engineering.' Many of the basics _are_ social engineering: picking up trash on a regular basis has social effects. We keep Clark Park as clean and well-maintained as we can because, when the park turns shitty, it affects the quality of life of the rest of the neighborhood. NIDs aren't created merely to compensate for declining city services; part of their reason for being is to strategize the way communities will grow and change in the foreseeable future. It may be something simple and prosaic (more streetside trees because the ones we have are dying), or it may be something more business-like (we want to attract certain kinds of businesses, like artists' shops or software companies or child-oriented stores). And marketing is an essential part of this. At the very least, it can offer local businesses a sort of advertising co-op, where economies of scale operate (advertise many businesses at once). The Executive Director described above is kind of a paradox. On the one hand, we want community-based direction. But we're asking for a great Executive Director to implement it. It's sort of like saying that we want a democracy, so we must find a Great Man to rule it. It's _possible_-- I've got a soft spot for FDR as an example-- but even _he_ had to put up with a lot of yelping cranks who saw no good in what he accomplished. 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] Proof that gentrification has run amok in the hood
Joshua Karstendick wrote: Speaking of gentrification, there was a hilarious article about it in the latest Onion: Shitty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/shitty_neighborhood_rallies Enjoy! Oh, I did, I didThat was magnificent. The Save Carney Neighborhood Foundation, the most organized non-criminal group in this part of town, has filed a lawsuit in federal court to block the scheduled April 2008 groundbreaking. While halting the project would surely prevent a tragic urban-planning nightmare, it would also mean keeping the run-down, economically depressed community exactly as it is. 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] UCD Related - Whoa
Elizabeth F Campion wrote: I think Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell made a mistake when she backed Knox. IMHO she gets things right more often than she gets things wrong, and she keeps my vote and admiration. John Fenton may (or may not) have put work effort and UCD resources into a political rally. IMHO there should have been clear, written policies and procedures; less jumping to conclusions and resounding support (and a second chance even if 'guilty') for a guy who gets more things right than wrong. I am glad he landed on his feet, working on behalf of our neighborhood Lewis Wendell may (or may not) have rushed to judgement on John. IMHO he is another good neighbor and hard worker who should be given the chance to learn from the events of recent days. I do not want another rush to judgement, especially in the absence of clear evidence and the presence of too much emotion. IMHO Lewis is someone who has gotten a lot right and who deserves a fair hearing and another chance. I think Craig is absolutely correct: “In business, as in sports, you always go for the very best talent available, even if it is not local”. With the caveat that the current 'player' be considered as to whether or not he may be the best available. Another good aphorism, is fix only the broken. IMHO it is UCD, not the director, that needs to be fixed. Like Al, I'd like to see an SSD emerge that gets back to the basics of clean and safe and drops the marketing, development, and social engineering roles that make it unpopular with me and many other neighbors. I want it to serve the neighbors of the neighborhood, not trample our culture and replace it with something artificially bright. Also, like Al, I want our SSD to operate in a transparent manner -- both functionally and fiscally. No one is perfect. I have few happy thoughts of JOHN FRYE, and feel a sense of good riddance. I am only moderately sorry he fell up (are FM and the suburbs up?). I have many good memories of hard and effective work by DL WORMLEY PAUL STEINKE and LEWIS WENDELL. It is easy to forgive and feel grateful to each for the maintenance and progress driven by their efforts. I am not prepared to see Lewis sacrificed to the current passion for vengeance or perceived opportunity. I hope that among the scenarios being considered are all the possible consequences of the costs /or benefits of a change at the helm of UCD. My preference, at least for now, is healing with LW in place. as always, we need to be careful in public discourse to avoid resorting to ad hominem. the issue here is not about personalities or personal likes/dislikes but about public organizations and the public roles involved, about the public actions that were and were not taken while assuming those roles within those organizations, about public accountability. and in this case a man was suspended, publicly, and a seriouis rift of mistrust between ucd and blackwell's office, between ucd and the community, was deepened, publicly, under wendell's leadership. none of this happened as a result of ucd's director acting in a private or personal capacity. as ucd's director, wendell has had years to strengthen and improve the relationship between ucd and blackwell, between ucd and the community. and he has had over a month to account, publicly, for the suspension of john fenton. so long as wendell remains the head of ucd and bears responsibility for fenton's suspension, the rift with blackwell, the community's mistrust, the damage to ucd and to penn, ucd's ability to move forward will be compromised, and it will be impossible for ucd to work credibly with other organizations (blackwell's office, penn, neighborhood associations). no one is perfect, but it must be remembered that wendell the private man can, as ever, continue to work personally with any of these agencies, just like the rest of us. .. 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] Proof that gentrification has run amok in the hood
Joshua Karstendick wrote: Speaking of gentrification, there was a hilarious article about it in the latest Onion: Shitty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/shitty_neighborhood_rallies Enjoy! I don't think what's happening in our hood is gentrification, and so the parody's wasted in our case :-( (unless we've all openly agreed and ackowledged that penn is indeed an 'asshole developer'. is that the deal?) .. 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] UCD Related - Whoa
I'm one of the biggest John Fenton supporters on this list -- but I really don't see what option UCD had. There were: 1) Serious allegations about UCD and a political campaign that were printed in the media 2) People _on this list_ so outraged by it that they were threatening to call for a government investigation -- Al, in fact, asked people to consider joining in a group complaint to the IRS on the use of [UCD]'s resrouces on behalf of a political candidate I think that if UCD had done nothing, there would have been several people here screaming that Lewis was whitewashing illegal activities, that crimes were being committed and nothing was being done. I think UCD's biggest deficiency here has been in not releasing any updates about the investigation -- even if to say the investigation is proceeding -- I've heard wild rumors on the street, but I've heard very little from actual sources. Why, for example, has no one interviewed the two students? This could have been cleared up in a day I think if someone asked them specific questions about what they did that day, in light of the councilwoman's explanation that there was a day-long neighborhood rally which she and tom knox stopped at for fifteen minutes. Did they put up campaign signs? Or did they cut grass? In the face of the allegations on the news I think suspension with pay during the investigation was the best way for UCD to protect themselves from accusations of whitewashing. What puzzles me is that the investigation took so long and that so little information has come out. So I'll ask, since you're suggesting Lewis should no longer run UCD because of his suspension of John, _how should_ have UCD met the accusations and avoided charges of covering up, ignoring, or whitewashing a misuse of funds? Kc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN and in this case a man was suspended, publicly, and a seriouis rift of mistrust between ucd and blackwell's office, between ucd and the community, was deepened, publicly, under wendell's leadership. none of this happened as a result of ucd's director acting in a private or personal capacity. as ucd's director, wendell has had years to strengthen and improve the relationship between ucd and blackwell, between ucd and the community. and he has had over a month to account, publicly, for the suspension of john fenton. so long as wendell remains the head of ucd and bears responsibility for fenton's suspension, the rift with blackwell, the community's mistrust, the damage to ucd and to penn, ucd's ability to move forward will be compromised, and it will be impossible for ucd to work credibly with other organizations (blackwell's office, penn, neighborhood associations). no one is perfect, but it must be remembered that wendell the private man can, as ever, continue to work personally with any of these agencies, just like the rest of us. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam(r)] [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. 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] UCD Related
Folks, I think Brian is on to something here. The NID is a hard thing to implement, because it supposed to be funded by a base annual income taken from the citizens in is geography, ie the surcharge that the city government would collect from us each year and give to the UCD. If the UCD needed more money above and beyond the surcharge monies then they could float a bond and collect extra donations to make up the difference of the operating costs. This is in fact what Lewis Wendell and the UCD steering committee have proposed. Argumentatively, it isn't just Lewis Wendell that's failng here, it's the very idea of a NID in general amongst many of the citizens in UC. We want more transparent accountability on the part of the UCD staff and steering committee. We want UC residents partly in control of the UCD to make sure that it's doing the people's bidding, not just the high rollers' (UPenn, Drexel, the Cira Center, Campus Apartments, etc.) bidding. Ideally this is actually what happens with NIDs and they are in fact a good thing. But because UPenn and its partners came at the idea backwards by creating the organization first without legally creating it as a NID by getting community approval, they have doomed themselves and us to this constant bickering about how to use this useful organization and how to fund it. This should have been clearly defined before the UCD was created. But here we are. We must take the UCD for what is is. We may never truly come together under a generalissimo UCD director, but that's hardly a problem. If UCD stayed as it is now getting funded by local businesses and citizens by choice rather than by surcharge, it could still survive on more meager means, it would simply provide less service. The question we need to ask is, is this a better idea than sucking it and giving some percentage of our real estate tax to UCD each year so that it can do every and anything we want it to do? Do we still want to take the recommendation of Wendell and the UCD steering committee to only take 12% of the annual RE tax from those with 4 or more bedroom units on the property? Do we want every landowner to maybe pay 6% of their annual RE tax instead so that everyone has skin in the game and can vote to restrain or enbolden specific UCD practices or works. Brian's right. This will only work if we will it to work. Lewis Wendell will do all that he can to keep UCD afloat and hopefully efficient and productive, but he and th rest of the UCD can't do it without our support. Eventually we as a community will have to make a deliberate attempt to uphold UCD or destroy it. Whatever democratic dialogue has been exchanged on this list for the past 2 years about what to do with UCD will become purely academic unless we the citizens of UC either shit or get off the pot. We need to reconsider the UCD NID plan. If changes need to be made, then we need to tell UCD what those specific legal and/or financial changes are and come to a compromise. If Lewis Wendell and his staff are out there and reading this post, please believe that you will have to give the local community the control it wants over everyday practices of UCD, if not day-to-day decisions. A charter that contains language from community member input will need to be discussed. While there are standard legal guidelines for NIDs in most every state, there is also the ability for each individual NID to create special stipulations and agreements that are specific to the community or neighborhood it serves and represents. I'm sure there is some compromise solution that can be worked out that will satisfy the majority of the UC landowning population as well as the current major UCD benefactors on the steering committee. I suggest that UC residents on this list post the one major concession or stipulation that you want UCD to honor, if we allow it to become a NID representing our neighborhood. One item of compromise above all others that you personally would require of the UCD. Send it to the listserv and after enough of the items are posted, then we can how rational and doable they really are from both our perspective and UCD's perspective. Mario Giorno 36 S. 48th Street Philadelphia, PA 19139 On 6/26/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 6/25/2007 3:57:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes (to Sali): Currently, the folks on the Board are footing the majority of the bill for clean and safe efforts in wide areas of University City. Do you think they'll keep doing that Wouldn't it depend on the extent to which the various parties are being honest about their intentions and agendas, and the corresponding goals for what a Special Services District (SSD) might be constituted to achieve, whether there's a real partnership between Penn (and the other institutions) and the community, the degree to which a NID might get back on the table after an
Re: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN wrote: as always, we need to be careful in public discourse to avoid resorting to ad hominem. the issue here is not about personalities or personal likes/dislikes but about public organizations and the public roles involved, about the public actions that were and were not taken while assuming those roles within those organizations, about public accountability. and in this case a man was suspended, publicly, and a seriouis rift of mistrust between ucd and blackwell's office, between ucd and the community, was deepened, publicly, under wendell's leadership. none of this happened as a result of ucd's director acting in a private or personal capacity. I was upset about UCD's handling of this, initially, but for one problem. What UCD did is _standard procedure_ for many such organizations. It's not _nice_, and it's not fair to Fenton. But it is, in many corporate organizations, SOP. UCD was handed allegations that one of its employees had done something that-- if true-- would have endangered UCD's status as a 501(c)3 organization. The allegations were, at the time, widely circulated, and given credence by many in the community. UCD _had_ to investigate this for any number of reasons-- and make their results known to a very contentious community. They had to determine if the allegations were true or not, to begin with. (And if they found that they _weren't_ true, they'd have to show that they weren't just whitewashing themselves.) If the allegations _were_ true, they'd have to determine a lot of other things. Was this a one-time-only violation? Was this a failure of existing policies? Was the employee aware of the violation? Alla that. In other words, where did the fault lie, and what should be done about it? So why is suspending the employee with pay SOP in such situations? Because such situations aren't always about John Fenton and this particular allegation. Employees may be investigated for such things as misrepresenting themselves or their company, or engaging in irregular bookkeeping procedures, or stealing or destroying sensitive documents. Internal investigations frequently require isolating people who are suspected of wrongdoing. It's not nice. Yes, people begin to suspect the person even more when he's been suspended. It's never fun to be investigated, and you feel _violated_ if your company does this to you. And we all think the world of John Fenton, who is a genuinely good guy who's done a lot for us. But UCD did what hundreds of other organizations would do in this situation. It's crummy, but it's nowhere near as _wrong_ as people claim. UCD was caught in a tough situation. If they didn't make an attempt at an internal investigation, they'd be accused of covering up or whitewashing the incident. If they did investigate, and exonerated Fenton, they'd be accused of covering up or whitewashing the incident. If they found that Fenton _did_ go out of bounds... well, if they let him off with a warning, they'd be accused of covering up or whitewashing the incident. And if they _did_ fire him over this, they'd get slammed for being mean and evil, and throwing away their best asset, and of being out of touch with the community, and there'd be calls for Lewis Wendell to resign, and... (GodDAMNit. I wrote all of the above, refreshed my email... and saw that Kyle's written pretty much the same thing.) 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] UCD Related
I think, as is often the case, Mario's got a good point. I can't remember who said it first (it might have been sharrieff) that ultimately UCD is accountable to it's funders. At the moment, that's not us. I agree that if we want to control the direction of UCD, then we need to be the ones paying for it. Otherwise it's like complaining to the guy sweeping your street for free that you'd rather he painted your house. UCD's a democracy of it's funders, it's just a question if we want to pony up what it takes to be part of the shareholders club. Had the NID passed, we would have gotten oversight of UCD through our councilwoman, who would have been able to keep the NID from renewing if she didn't like the way it was run. As it is, we have no oversight apart from complaining to one another on this list, which is probably a lot like barking into the wind. When you're paying the guy, you get to tell the guy what to do. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mario Giorno Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 12:05 PM To: univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related Folks, I think Brian is on to something here. The NID is a hard thing to implement, because it supposed to be funded by a base annual income taken from the citizens in is geography, ie the surcharge that the city government would collect from us each year and give to the UCD. If the UCD needed more money above and beyond the surcharge monies then they could float a bond and collect extra donations to make up the difference of the operating costs. This is in fact what Lewis Wendell and the UCD steering committee have proposed. Argumentatively, it isn't just Lewis Wendell that's failng here, it's the very idea of a NID in general amongst many of the citizens in UC. We want more transparent accountability on the part of the UCD staff and steering committee. We want UC residents partly in control of the UCD to make sure that it's doing the people's bidding, not just the high rollers' (UPenn, Drexel, the Cira Center, Campus Apartments, etc.) bidding. Ideally this is actually what happens with NIDs and they are in fact a good thing. But because UPenn and its partners came at the idea backwards by creating the organization first without legally creating it as a NID by getting community approval, they have doomed themselves and us to this constant bickering about how to use this useful organization and how to fund it. This should have been clearly defined before the UCD was created. But here we are. We must take the UCD for what is is. We may never truly come together under a generalissimo UCD director, but that's hardly a problem. If UCD stayed as it is now getting funded by local businesses and citizens by choice rather than by surcharge, it could still survive on more meager means, it would simply provide less service. The question we need to ask is, is this a better idea than sucking it and giving some percentage of our real estate tax to UCD each year so that it can do every and anything we want it to do? Do we still want to take the recommendation of Wendell and the UCD steering committee to only take 12% of the annual RE tax from those with 4 or more bedroom units on the property? Do we want every landowner to maybe pay 6% of their annual RE tax instead so that everyone has skin in the game and can vote to restrain or enbolden specific UCD practices or works. Brian's right. This will only work if we will it to work. Lewis Wendell will do all that he can to keep UCD afloat and hopefully efficient and productive, but he and th rest of the UCD can't do it without our support. Eventually we as a community will have to make a deliberate attempt to uphold UCD or destroy it. Whatever democratic dialogue has been exchanged on this list for the past 2 years about what to do with UCD will become purely academic unless we the citizens of UC either shit or get off the pot. We need to reconsider the UCD NID plan. If changes need to be made, then we need to tell UCD what those specific legal and/or financial changes are and come to a compromise. If Lewis Wendell and his staff are out there and reading this post, please believe that you will have to give the local community the control it wants over everyday practices of UCD, if not day-to-day decisions. A charter that contains language from community member input will need to be discussed. While there are standard legal guidelines for NIDs in most every state, there is also the ability for each individual NID to create special stipulations and agreements that are specific to the community or neighborhood it serves and represents. I'm sure there is some compromise solution that can be worked out that will satisfy the majority of the UC landowning population as well as the current major UCD benefactors on the steering committee. I suggest that UC residents on this list post the one major concession or stipulation that you want
Re: [UC] UCD Related
In a message dated 6/26/2007 12:28:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can't remember who said it first (it might have been sharrieff) that ultimately UCD is accountable to it's funders. You're not getting the sense of the statement. It was that UCD is accountable to its funders, which explains why they're at such cross-purposes with the community in general. And the reason why transparency and participation should be the modus operandi is that Penn keeps touting its partnership with the community as if we're all in it together. The unpleasant reality is that Penn does what it pleases -- and co-opts a few local groups so it can make believe it has a partnership going. The whole thing is a lie. Has been from the start. Still is. The anointed are so sure they've got the franchise on wisdom and morality that they never listen or learn. That's why the NID is dead. That's why Wendell is a has-been. Always at your service ready for a dialog, Al Krigman ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
RE: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa [clarification]
It's been pointed out to me off list that Al might not have actually asked people to consider joining a group complaint rather he provided information for those interested in ... joining a group complaint in reaction to UCD using its resources on behalf of a political campaign, and my statement may have been amiss -- so I'll just reprint what I was thinking of and let people decide for themselves what he meant. Perhaps I should have worded it Al threatened to file a complaint with the IRS _individually_ and provided information for others wishing to file their own or join in a group complaint: June 2, 2007 UCD continues to be less than forthcoming about the internal investigation of its violation of the laws under which it operates as a tax-exempt organization. Namely through the use of its resources on behalf of a political candidate in the recent mayoral primary. Those of us who question the NID proposal by UCD, which includes UCD's management of what amounts to a QUANGO in the event it does happen to be formed, have been holding back on filing complaints with the IRS questioning UCD's tax-exempt status. ... In preparation for what might happen if UCD continues to stonewall, those interested in filing complaints or joining in a group complaint might want to read IRS Treatment of third-party information relating to tax-exempt organizations -- _Click here: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-news/fs-02-10.pdf_ (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-news/fs-02-10.pdf) Al Krigman Left of Ivan Grozny [whole post here: http://www.mail-archive.com/univcity@list.purple.com/msg17302.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] UCD Related
A good point that Al makes is that there seems to be no knowledge, scientifically, of what people who live here actually think about ucd. Are we all in this together? I have no idea if 2% of the population is in favor of UCD or 97%. As far as I can tell, there's never been a survey, so we're all in the dark about who's in what with whom. Community meetings only bring out a certain subset of the population, as do community organizations. I'd be interested in someone going door-to-door and polling 2,000 residents and finding out how they feel about not just this, but a variety of community issues. I suspect that most of them would actually say UCD who? Kc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 12:50 PM To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related In a message dated 6/26/2007 12:28:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can't remember who said it first (it might have been sharrieff) that ultimately UCD is accountable to it's funders. You're not getting the sense of the statement. It was that UCD is accountable to its funders, which explains why they're at such cross-purposes with the community in general. And the reason why transparency and participation should be the modus operandi is that Penn keeps touting its partnership with the community as if we're all in it together. The unpleasant reality is that Penn does what it pleases -- and co-opts a few local groups so it can make believe it has a partnership going. The whole thing is a lie. Has been from the start. Still is. The anointed are so sure they've got the franchise on wisdom and morality that they never listen or learn. That's why the NID is dead. That's why Wendell is a has-been. Always at your service ready for a dialog, Al Krigman See what's free at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000503 . 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] UCD Related - Whoa
In a message dated 6/26/07 11:34:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: as always, we need to be careful in public discourse to avoid resorting to ad hominem. the issue here is not about personalities or personal likes/dislikes but about public organizations and the public roles involved, about the public actions that were and were not taken while assuming those roles within those organizations, about public accountability. and in this case a man was suspended, publicly, and a seriouis rift of mistrust between ucd and blackwell's office, between ucd and the community, was deepened, publicly, under wendell's leadership. none of this happened as a result of ucd's director acting in a private or personal capacity. Oh, Ray, I think it IS about personalities; it's almost TOTALLY about personalities. Al Krigman and folks who share his viewpoint have been working to discredit the UCD in our eyes and the Councilwoman's eyes for several years now, because they don't want to pay $7 per apartment per month or less for a Business Improvement District. It's that simple, actually. Whenever the UCD held a meeting to get feedback and information to help refine and finalize the BID proposal, the antis shouted Lewis down and shouted BID supporters down, then complained afterwards that supporters were allowed to speak at all! - though they took to the podium one after another chanting NO NID!, made grossly misleading statements, and offered no suggestions or circumstances in which they'd be willing to pay anything at all. They booed supporters. They didn't LET UCD collect helpful feedback at public meetings. Consequently, UCD was not able to hold the kind of productive, win-win meetings that the Councilwoman and most of the rest of us would have liked to see. How many times do you open the doors and provide a setting for the same few people to come in and shout at you, before you realize that that isn't going to help finalize the details of a project? To their credit, other individuals who liked the concept but not all of the details quietly provided helpful suggestions to the UCD, and those have been worked into the BID proposal as much as possible. But the antis have found very effective ways to inflame and divide: for example, Al Krigman repeatedly blames UCD for business failures, though he knows none of the ACTUAL reasons - things no one knew in advance, which doomed a couple of small entrepreneurs to failure, such as unrealistic cash flow expectations, family disruptions, fluctuating business hours. These are not the fault of the UCD! But the reasons for failures don't matter to Al! He and other antis have found a foolproof way to accuse: always accuse UCD of something where it's impossible to respond without publicizing the private, personal details of individuals' relationships and lives. And then, when they don't respond, accuse them of not responding, too! UCD is the honorable party here, in that they did NOT rise to the bait and tell all in situations where they would hurt individuals and businesses. So, the antis continue, relentless. And Lewis Wendell still has not risen to the bait and given private information, if he has any, about John Fenton. That is to his credit. It must be hard to remain silent when being unjustly accused. as ucd's director, wendell has had years to strengthen and improve the relationship between ucd and blackwell, between ucd and the community. and he has had over a month to account, publicly, for the suspension of john fenton. Lewis arrived at the UCD barely two years ago, after the Councilwoman disagreed with both of his predecessors, and now she disagrees with Lewis as well. Is this his failure, or are there other forces at work? For example, the Councilwoman does not appear to agree with Michael Nutter (this isn't an insult to anyone; you can check their voting records in City Council).is it personal, for which someone might assign one or both of them blame? Or political, in which case it's a disagreement as old as the hills? If it's political, how can any director remain true to the mission for which s/he's been hired, yet change the Councilwoman's perspective? so long as wendell remains the head of ucd and bears responsibility for fenton's suspension, the rift with blackwell, the community's mistrust, the damage to ucd and to penn, ucd's ability to move forward will be compromised, and it will be impossible for ucd to work credibly with other organizations (blackwell's office, penn, neighborhood associations). I think it's pretty clear that when this incident was reported in the Daily News, whether John Fenton was suspended or not, there would have been folks with ulterior motives who would have attacked the UCD and any director in that job at this moment. And there would surely have been attacks if he said/ she said details about an employee
[UC] So What's New?
Hello List, I am back from a month in Italy. Ahh, it was wonderful! But now I need to catch up after about a month of no Internet access. What's happenin' in the hood? What's this I hear about Duane from Abbraccio?? And, most importantly, *when* is the Farmer's Market at Clark Park? Thanks for the Update. Sincerely, Susan Jacobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Susan Jacobson, PhD Department of Journalism Temple University [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] UCD - clarifying the UCD/BID relationship
In a message dated 6/26/07 12:07:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But here we are. We must take the UCD for what is is. We may never truly come together under a generalissimo UCD director, but that's hardly a problem. If UCD stayed as it is now getting funded by local businesses and citizens by choice rather than by surcharge, it could still survive on more meager means, it would simply provide less service. The question we need to ask is, is this a better idea than sucking it and giving some percentage of our real estate tax to UCD each year so that it can do every and anything we want it to do? Do we still want to take the recommendation of Wendell and the UCD steering committee to only take 12% of the annual RE tax from those with 4 or more bedroom units on the property? Do we want every landowner to maybe pay 6% of their annual RE tax instead so that everyone has skin in the game and can vote to restrain or enbolden specific UCD practices or works. Brian's right. This will only work if we will it to work. Lewis Wendell will do all that he can to keep UCD afloat and hopefully efficient and productive, but he and th rest of the UCD can't do it without our support. Eventually we as a community will have to make a deliberate attempt to uphold UCD or destroy it. Whatever democratic dialogue has been exchanged on this list for the past 2 years about what to do with UCD will become purely academic unless we the citizens of UC either shit or get off the pot. We need to reconsider the UCD NID plan. If changes need to be made, then we need to tell UCD what those specific legal and/or financial changes are and come to a compromise. Just to be clear, the BID proposal was IN ADDITION to the current UCD services. It was to fund clean and safe operations on MORE streets. What was proposed was not to replace the UCD with a BID; it was to add a BID component to the already existing UCD. So there would have been a BID with a Steering Committee, working with the UCD and its Board - a little bit like what Guy Laren proposed, when he suggested that somebody else could form a BID and subcontract to UCD for workers and services. So if the frugal landlords prevail and there is no BID, that does not automatically shut down the UCD; it just doesn't allow the expansion of services farther into the western and more residential areas of the neighborhood. Which some folks think is just fine, if they do lots of block clean ups and aren't feeling the need for more safety ambassador patrols. But what's happening now, in this outcry of anger at the UCD, must be making the people who pay for the UCD itself pause. If the neighborhood doesn't want their free clean, safe and marketing efforts - what should they do? Might they feel it's better to get out of the hot seat and quietly go back inside their buildings and do nothing? Would that really be an improvement for us in the neighborhood? 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] UCD Related - Whoa
So what can we (we being people opposed to the cranks and greedy landlords and other anti-BID forces) do? - Mike V.
Re: [UC] UCD Related
Folks, I will reiterate my request at the end of my last post on this thread. If there were on concession or stipulation above all others that you would require from the UCD before we gave them NID status, what would it be. If we want to actually create a NID, we need to compromise with the UCD staff and steering committee on what specific work it will do, how it will carry out this work and what overriding guidelines, rules or best practices you want the institution to follow. For those of you who don't know exactly what UCD is, just go to http://www.ucityphila.org to view their website. Their website offers information about the organization and its mission. Under the University City Information subheading on their home page, click the tab that says: BID Business Improvement District Information This will bring you up to speed on the NID/BID discussion. Mario Giorno 36 S. 48th Street Philadelphia, PA19139 On 6/26/07, Kyle Cassidy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A good point that Al makes is that there seems to be no knowledge, scientifically, of what people who live here actually think about ucd. Are we all in this together? I have no idea if 2% of the population is in favor of UCD or 97%. As far as I can tell, there's never been a survey, so we're all in the dark about who's in what with whom. Community meetings only bring out a certain subset of the population, as do community organizations. I'd be interested in someone going door-to-door and polling 2,000 residents and finding out how they feel about not just this, but a variety of community issues. I suspect that most of them would actually say UCD who? Kc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 12:50 PM To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related In a message dated 6/26/2007 12:28:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can't remember who said it first (it might have been sharrieff) that ultimately UCD is accountable to it's funders. You're not getting the sense of the statement. It was that UCD is accountable to its funders, which explains why they're at such cross-purposes with the community in general. And the reason why transparency and participation should be the modus operandi is that Penn keeps touting its partnership with the community as if we're all in it together. The unpleasant reality is that Penn does what it pleases -- and co-opts a few local groups so it can make believe it has a partnership going. The whole thing is a lie. Has been from the start. Still is. The anointed are so sure they've got the franchise on wisdom and morality that they never listen or learn. That's why the NID is dead. That's why Wendell is a has-been. Always at your service ready for a dialog, Al Krigman See what's free at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000503 . 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] UCD Related - Whoa
The triggering messages contain too much 'spin', and ongoing, unsupported attack. Simplicity is most notable by its absence. It is outrageous to define Al's motives. Neighbors should be able to agree to disagree, without being assigned to some clique-du-jour (either in out of favor). For the record: I have found Al to be both thrifty and extraordinarily generous (across a broad spectrum of causes and with all of money, time, advice and housing.) One of the things I've learned from Lewis Wendell is to notice how mean-spirited some of the folks on this list (including at times me) can be. Hopefully he has helped me improve my self and posts. Liz On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:06:43 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ... Al Krigman and folks who share his viewpoint have been working to discredit the UCD in our eyes and the Councilwoman's eyes for several years now, because they don't want to pay $7 per apartment per month or less for a Business Improvement District. It's that simple, actually. ...
Re: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa
In a message dated 6/26/07 1:51:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So what can we (we being people opposed to the cranks and greedy landlords and other anti-BID forces) do? - Mike V. I don't know, Mike, but I'd certainly be interested in suggestions. Melani 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] UCD Related - Whoa
In a message dated 6/26/07 1:55:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Simplicity is most notable by its absence. Liz, when are your posts ever simple? I think the notable thing here is that, as often as you and I disagree, neither of us feels that calling for Lewis Wendell's resignation is appropriate here. That's simplicity! Melani 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] UCD Related - Whoa
Mike, Let me know what one requirement, if you were a landowner, you would want UCD or a NID/BID to follow above all others. What major requirement would you make of your local NID/BID? Mario On 6/26/07, Mike V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So what can we (we being people opposed to the cranks and greedy landlords and other anti-BID forces) do? - Mike V.
Re: [UC] UCD - clarifying the UCD/BID relationship
Melani, Why does the UCD, its staff and steering committee, want to have two separate legal entities? What would the scope of control be in such a scenario? I'm assuming both non-profit orgs would each have their own separate funds. Would the local landowners paying into the BID/NID no longer have any say in how UCD is run, even if they have a say on how the BID/NID is run? Why would the neighborhood want two non-profit entities when only one seems to be required here? What is the reasoning for this increase in bureaucracy? At what point was this dual entity solution explicitly put forward. Every meeting I've gone to in the past two years and the discussion by Mr. Huston mentioned nothing about there being two non-profits, one the BID/NID and one the current UCD. Mario Giorno 36 S. 48th Street Philadelphia, PA 19139 On 6/26/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * In a message dated 6/26/07 12:07:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * But here we are. We must take the UCD for what is is. We may never truly come together under a generalissimo UCD director, but that's hardly a problem. If UCD stayed as it is now getting funded by local businesses and citizens by choice rather than by surcharge, it could still survive on more meager means, it would simply provide less service. The question we need to ask is, is this a better idea than sucking it and giving some percentage of our real estate tax to UCD each year so that it can do every and anything we want it to do? Do we still want to take the recommendation of Wendell and the UCD steering committee to only take 12% of the annual RE tax from those with 4 or more bedroom units on the property? Do we want every landowner to maybe pay 6% of their annual RE tax instead so that everyone has skin in the game and can vote to restrain or enbolden specific UCD practices or works. Brian's right. This will only work if we will it to work. Lewis Wendell will do all that he can to keep UCD afloat and hopefully efficient and productive, but he and th rest of the UCD can't do it without our support. Eventually we as a community will have to make a deliberate attempt to uphold UCD or destroy it. Whatever democratic dialogue has been exchanged on this list for the past 2 years about what to do with UCD will become purely academic unless we the citizens of UC either shit or get off the pot. We need to reconsider the UCD NID plan. If changes need to be made, then we need to tell UCD what those specific legal and/or financial changes are and come to a compromise. Just to be clear, the BID proposal was IN ADDITION to the current UCD services. It was to fund clean and safe operations on MORE streets. What was proposed was *not to replace* the UCD with a BID; it was *to add* a BID component to the already existing UCD. So there would have been a BID with a Steering Committee, working with the UCD and its Board - a little bit like what Guy Laren proposed, when he suggested that somebody else could form a BID and subcontract to UCD for workers and services. So if the frugal landlords prevail and there is no BID, that does not automatically shut down the UCD; it just doesn't allow the expansion of services farther into the western and more residential areas of the neighborhood. Which some folks think is just fine, if they do lots of block clean ups and aren't feeling the need for more safety ambassador patrols. But what's happening now, in this outcry of anger at the UCD, must be making the people who pay for the UCD itself pause. If the neighborhood doesn't want their free clean, safe and marketing efforts - what should they do? Might they feel it's better to get out of the hot seat and quietly go back inside their buildings and do nothing? Would that really be an improvement for us in the neighborhood? 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] UCD Related - Whoa
Putting more feet on the street and reducing neighborhood crime levels would be my #1. - Mike V. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mario Giorno Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:07 PM To: univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa Mike, Let me know what one requirement, if you were a landowner, you would want UCD or a NID/BID to follow above all others. What major requirement would you make of your local NID/BID? Mario On 6/26/07, Mike V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So what can we (we being people opposed to the cranks and greedy landlords and other anti-BID forces) do? - Mike V.
Re: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa
I second that emotion! On 6/26/07, Mike V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Putting more feet on the street and reducing neighborhood crime levels would be my #1. - Mike V. -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Mario Giorno *Sent:* Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:07 PM *To:* univcity@list.purple.com *Subject:* Re: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa Mike, Let me know what one requirement, if you were a landowner, you would want UCD or a NID/BID to follow above all others. What major requirement would you make of your local NID/BID? Mario On 6/26/07, Mike V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So what can we (we being people opposed to the cranks and greedy landlords and other anti-BID forces) do? - Mike V.
Re: [UC] So What's New?
Susan Jacobson wrote: Hello List, I am back from a month in Italy. Ahh, it was wonderful! But now I need to catch up after about a month of no Internet access. What's happenin' in the hood? What's this I hear about Duane from Abbraccio?? And, most importantly, *when* is the Farmer's Market at Clark Park? Farmer's Markets: Thursday afternoons until 7, and on Saturdays 10-2. http://www.clarkpark.info 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] UCD Related - Whoa, now simplicity
I long to own talent of the magnitudes exhibited by Ross, Ray, Frank, Kyle and others. I have to settle for sharing meals and reading (and sometimes buying) examples of their art. As someone who attended Catholic School for 12 years, I generally fault my posts for being too simple. I favor declarative statements and documentable facts. Don't mistake length for complication. I blame PENN for the length. While pursuing a degree, too often length was weighted too heavily in grading. I get lots of off-list posts reminding me to edit. I hope I improve in the area of brevity. Simply... do not confuse my support of Lewis with support for a NID. Personally, I stand to benefit from any program that cleans up after other people. But, my principles are against erecting a slippery slope that: Taxes one segment of the population and not others Discriminates by source of income and choice of 'work Decreases individual responsibility Removes incentives and disincentives for neighborhood cooperation Creates another layer of self funding bureaucracy (like PPA that exists to ticket not resolve bad parking) Might be a tool to promote the HD (truly evil, in MHO) And so, I am not likely to make much noise for or against a BID, but would be probably correct or protest any false, manipulative or even simply naive representations. Sorry, but I can't back BIDs. I am willing to continue to do more than My Share, and keep my properties (and adjacent sidewalks and storm drains) clean and decorated and also work to promote: better use of the services that should be delivered based upon our existing taxes neighborhood cooperation, especially assistance to the elderly, fragile and overwhelmed tree planting and tending self reliance common sense solutions (like storm drain clearing) to snow and water removal expressions of gratitude to our many neighborhood volunteers (including Melani) when they make worthwhile contributions. Liz On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:58:32 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 6/26/07 1:55:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Simplicity is most notable by its absence. Liz, when are your posts ever simple? I think the notable thing here is that, as often as you and I disagree, neither of us feels that calling for Lewis Wendell's resignation is appropriate here. That's simplicity! Melani
RE: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa
I'm down with that. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mario Giorno Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:16 PM I second that emotion! On 6/26/07, Mike V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Putting more feet on the street and reducing neighborhood crime levels would be my #1. - Mike V. 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] UCD - clarifying the UCD/BID relationship
In a message dated 6/26/07 2:07:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Melani, Why does the UCD, its staff and steering committee, want to have two separate legal entities? What would the scope of control be in such a scenario? I'm assuming both non-profit orgs would each have their own separate funds. Would the local landowners paying into the BID/NID no longer have any say in how UCD is run, even if they have a say on how the BID/NID is run? Why would the neighborhood want two non-profit entities when only one seems to be required here? What is the reasoning for this increase in bureaucracy? At what point was this dual entity solution explicitly put forward. Every meeting I've gone to in the past two years and the discussion by Mr. Huston mentioned nothing about there being two non-profits, one the BID/NID and one the current UCD. Mario Giorno Hi, Mario, I'm sure everybody's getting tired of my posts this afternoon, and Al is probably going to threaten again to sue me, so I'll try to be brief. And remember that I am not an official or even unofficial spokesperson for the UCD or the BID. I'm sorry that the BID meetings weren't more informative, but would you agree that there were a number of folks at the meetings who wanted to create an uproar rather than getting down to working out the details? You ask a very good question. The UCD was founded before the PA enabling legislation allowed a BID to be funded by landlords, so that's why the organization didn't start out as a BID. Maybe someday the two would be able, if the BID were to be approved, to streamline into one organization. But right now the UDC exists and the BID remains uncertain, given the very vocal opposition, so I don't think anyone considered CLOSING the UCD and REPLACING it. Plus, the landlords who have provided feedback and the community reps who have chimed in have stated that they don't want marketing and some other components. So, the BID as proposed currently would concentrate on clean and safe and stay out of the services that its funders don't want. But others involved with the UCD do want those services, so if there are two organizations working together, the people who want the other services (the institutions) can pay the UCD for those AND for their share of clean and safe, and the BID funders can pay only for the limited services they want. I'm not sure the landlords want to pay for park improvements, etc., but to others, those are the things we wouldn't want to do without. The BID proposal didn't change the makeup of the UCD board, so where there are currently landlords and community representatives on the UCD board, they would still be there. It proposed a BID advisory board of landlords and business owners, most recently written to have several each in the categories of larger, midsized and smaller entities. As I mentioned before, suggestions and changes have been heard, considered, and incorporated into the proposal as much as possible under BID law. Unfortunately the BID law does not allow some of the suggestions folks have made, and some folks seem disinclined to believe that; instead, they just fault the UCD for not doing things THEIR way. There are a lot of issues, wants needs to be considered - including the law! Your point is helpful - if you weren't aware of this, others probably weren't either, and we won't be able to get anywhere till we all understand the ground rules. Thanks, Melani 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] UCD Related - Whoa, now simplicity
In a message dated 6/26/07 2:26:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Simply... do not confuse my support of Lewis with support for a NID. No, I will not make that mistake; I agree that they are not at all the same. What worries me is that folks call for Lewis' and the current UCD's overthrow - changing the mission, board and director of the UCD - and point to opposition to the NID/BID to justify Lewis' removal. The current flap was not about a NID or BID; it was a complex personnel issue within the UCD. I don't want to see the UCD destroyed to be sure that there will be no BID. PA BID law requires notification and the opportunity to oppose, by all who would be assessed, once a BID is introduced in City Council. A BID cannot come into being without that democratic process. There's no need to kill the UCD, to be sure of avoiding the BID. And there's no need to force Lewis Wendell out for doing his job. Melani ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [UC] So What's New?
On 6/26/07, Susan Jacobson wrote: I am back from a month in Italy. Ahh, it was wonderful! But now I need to catch up after about a month of no Internet access. What's happenin' in the hood? Well all cats were banned from Clark Park and there are wanted signs for Scrunch and Mr. Itchy at the Green Line after they knifed a couple tots playing on the stone turtle. -s 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] UCD - clarifying the UCD/BID relationship
Melani, Thanks for the information. I guess there are a good deal of competing interests. all the more reason for getting people to tell the greater community what specifically they want out of both the UCD and NID/BID organization. I'll also have to look into the laws governing the establishment and use of NIDs in Pennsylvania. I'll have to beg the indulgence of a lawyer to explain any inherent restrictions or prohibitions that PA has regulated for NIDs. Mario :-) On 6/26/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 6/26/07 2:07:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Melani, Why does the UCD, its staff and steering committee, want to have two separate legal entities? What would the scope of control be in such a scenario? I'm assuming both non-profit orgs would each have their own separate funds. Would the local landowners paying into the BID/NID no longer have any say in how UCD is run, even if they have a say on how the BID/NID is run? Why would the neighborhood want two non-profit entities when only one seems to be required here? What is the reasoning for this increase in bureaucracy? At what point was this dual entity solution explicitly put forward. Every meeting I've gone to in the past two years and the discussion by Mr. Huston mentioned nothing about there being two non-profits, one the BID/NID and one the current UCD. Mario Giorno Hi, Mario, I'm sure everybody's getting tired of my posts this afternoon, and Al is probably going to threaten again to sue me, so I'll try to be brief. And remember that I am not an official or even unofficial spokesperson for the UCD or the BID. I'm sorry that the BID meetings weren't more informative, but would you agree that there were a number of folks at the meetings who wanted to create an uproar rather than getting down to working out the details? You ask a very good question. The UCD was founded before the PA enabling legislation allowed a BID to be funded by landlords, so that's why the organization didn't start out as a BID. Maybe someday the two would be able, if the BID were to be approved, to streamline into one organization. But right now the UDC exists and the BID remains uncertain, given the very vocal opposition, so I don't think anyone considered CLOSING the UCD and REPLACING it. Plus, the landlords who have provided feedback and the community reps who have chimed in have stated that they don't want marketing and some other components. So, the BID as proposed currently would concentrate on clean and safe and stay out of the services that its funders don't want. But others involved with the UCD do want those services, so if there are two organizations working together, the people who want the other services (the institutions) can pay the UCD for those AND for their share of clean and safe, and the BID funders can pay only for the limited services they want. I'm not sure the landlords want to pay for park improvements, etc., but to others, those are the things we wouldn't want to do without. The BID proposal didn't change the makeup of the UCD board, so where there are currently landlords and community representatives on the UCD board, they would still be there. It proposed a BID advisory board of *landlords and business owners*, most recently written to have several each in the categories of larger, midsized and smaller entities. As I mentioned before, suggestions and changes have been heard, considered, and incorporated into the proposal as much as possible under BID law. Unfortunately the BID law does not allow some of the suggestions folks have made, and some folks seem disinclined to believe that; instead, they just fault the UCD for not doing things THEIR way. There are a lot of issues, wants needs to be considered - including the law! Your point is helpful - if you weren't aware of this, others probably weren't either, and we won't be able to get anywhere till we all understand the ground rules. Thanks, Melani *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] Contractor Recs.
Hi All, I am looking for an interior painter to prep and paint the trim in my hallways. Any recommendations? I am also still looking for a plumber, some one to do a glass block window and someone to redo my brick patio... Please take a second and help me out! Thanks!!! An off-list reply would be appreciated. Cheers, Mark
Re: [UC] UCD Related
Mario Giorno wrote: Folks, I will reiterate my request at the end of my last post on this thread. If there were on concession or stipulation above all others that you would require from the UCD before we gave them NID status, what would it be. If we want to actually create a NID, we need to compromise with the UCD staff and steering committee on what specific work it will do, how it will carry out this work and what overriding guidelines, rules or best practices you want the institution to follow. Here's a few, without much thought behind them; 1. Crime. Not that we're a crime-riddled shithole, but crime is almost always our first concern. So I'd want there to be adequate police presence in the neighborhood, along with open public reporting on crimes and trends of crime in the neighborhood. I don't think this is a particularly original demand, so I'll leave it at that. 2. Physical Plant and Maintenance. This is actually a big area. There's trash pickup, of course, which everyone wants. But in a sense, that's a status quo job; it doesn't require changing things in a big way. I'd want to see planning for things like street lighting, tree replantings, and many other aesthetic issues that contribute to a pleasant neighborhood. So I'd want our NID to coordinate with UC Green on things like greenery, with the FoCP and Philly Parks Alliance for the Park, etc., etc. This sort of thing requires planning for the future, and may involve facing people who insists that nothing _needs_ to be done to, say, replace a tree or upgrade lighting. 3. Coordination for Business and Local Economy Growth Some may regard this as social engineering and control, but it helps to have a business climate that's _directed_ in some way or another. For example, there have been efforts to revitalize the Baltimore Avenue corridor. I suspect that many in our neighborhood don't want to see it turn into modern-day South Street, with heaps of chain stores like the Gap or and gaudy franchises like McDonald's or KFC, and I'm under the impression that UCD has been trying to avoid this as well. And there are some franchises that do appeal to our demographic, like Fresh Fields or Trader Joe's or Restoration Hardware. So a degree of community-involved design seems to be desirable here. Also, one wants to see the area kept useful and alive. If there's a vacant storefront, there ought to be an agency that works to fill it with a business. It may require publicity and marketing of our wonderful area. It may require establishing business loans to entrepreneurs to establish locations in the area. 4. Marketing Many here complain about the marketing of our area, and yeah, the stuff UCD comes up with sounds trite and hackneyed (funky vibe, indeed!). But the area does require some marketing-- to bring in businesses, homeowners and investment. 5. Community and Homeowner Support I want to cast back to the Historic District debacle for a moment. The fact is that placing our homes under the PHC was one of the worst ideas Spruce Hill's ever floated on our behalf. The operating principle there was to force homeowners to spend, spend spend or they'd be prosecuted. I'd suggest initiatives and incentives to _help_ homeowners improve their homes. Maybe we could help a local hardware store expand to provide more home-repair and gardening materials, with regular seminars-kaffeklatches to Learn How. (D.L. Wormley used to run things like this. Great idea.) Or, here's an idea. My side of Larchwood is taken up with about a half-dozen connected row homes, sharing flat roofs. It'd be nice if we could get a group discount on rooftop solar panel systems, and get'em all done at once. So, maybe we could be examining alternative energy systems that would be too expensive for single homeowners... but feasible and beneficial if done in coordinated groups. But generally: We live in an area that's getting expensive-- even for those of us who bought years ago, the property taxes are going to hit us hard one of these days. So a decent organization ought to be working for the benefit of homeowners. 6. Renters Here's a tricky question. What role would renters have here? They get the benefit of the improvements of this hypothetical organization. And they'd be paying in, indirectly, through their landlords. Many are short-term renters, students mainly, who don't have the same stake in the neighborhood as do homeowners, and business owners. It's a large part of our daily life, what with the parties, the trash, the traffic, and the like. So this organization would have to deal with these things-- and perhaps provide some services for the local renter population, like a placement service perhaps, or advocacy for renters' rights. But there are long-term renters whose love for and involvement with this community is as strong as that of any mortgage-bearer. Many prefer renting for whatever reason (repair
Re: [UC] So What's New?
Wow, the ghost of Scrunch the Cat is haunting Clark Park? How cool is that! I thought if he would haunt anywhere it would be Kyle's backyard where his little furry body is buried... ;-) sj Original message Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:04:23 -0400 From: Shawn Medero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] So What's New? To: UnivCity@list.purple.com On 6/26/07, Susan Jacobson wrote: I am back from a month in Italy. Ahh, it was wonderful! But now I need to catch up after about a month of no Internet access. What's happenin' in the hood? Well all cats were banned from Clark Park and there are wanted signs for Scrunch and Mr. Itchy at the Green Line after they knifed a couple tots playing on the stone turtle. -s 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. Susan Jacobson, PhD Department of Journalism Temple University [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proof that gentrification has run amok in the hood
Yes. We all agree that Penn is an asshole developer. That's why the article is funny and relevant. -Dan O On 6/26/07, UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joshua Karstendick wrote: Speaking of gentrification, there was a hilarious article about it in the latest Onion: Shitty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/shitty_neighborhood_rallies Enjoy! I don't think what's happening in our hood is gentrification, and so the parody's wasted in our case :-( (unless we've all openly agreed and ackowledged that penn is indeed an 'asshole developer'. is that the deal?) .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam(r)] [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. -- Dan Ohlemiller, MA 4838-4840 Walton Ave Philadelphia PA 19143 267-259-0464 CONFIDENTIAL AND PRE-DECISIONAL DOCUMENT 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] UCD Related - Whoa
I'm not going to respond to this point by point, but I will say a few things: Al Krigman and folks who share his viewpoint have been working to discredit the UCD in our eyes and the Councilwoman's eyes for several years now, because they don't want to pay $7 per apartment per month or less for a Business Improvement District. It's that simple, actually. Nothing is ever that simple. First of all, I don't particularly like UCD. I don't like their top-down, arrogant, my-way-or-the-highway, we-know-what's-best-for-you-people administration. I have to thank Glenn for introducing me to the term astroturfing, or fake grass-roots, because that is basically UCD's operating strategy: present a plan to the community fully formed, get us to buy into it, then palm it off as a community collaboration. That was what was done with the NID: UCD selected a steering committee full of people with major business connections to the University of Pennsylvania or UCD, who drafted the original NID plan with no input from anyone who represented the bulk of the people who would have to pay the tax. All of this was done behind closed doors, and then UCD had those three meetings where they basically told everyone this is what we're going to do, this is what you'll have to pay, and this is what we're going to do with the money. Then they were genuinely shocked when no one bought it, and were openly hostile to it. I have a problem with giving UCD/Penn the power of taxation, and the right to dictate everything that goes on in the neighborhood. But saying that, I don't wish UCD any ill, and as long as they pick up trash or provide safety patrols, they're fine. But I just don't happen to think that picking up trash automatically gives them the right to become an unelected, unaccountable quasi-government answerable only to the University of Pennsylvania, and some private deep pockets. I don't care how they organize the NIDMA: I believe that the final result will be one that Penn and the big landlords will find a way of dominating. I am not in favor of the NID because I am opposed to singling out a small portion of the neighborhood to pay for a service the entire neighborhood benefits from. I believe this was done because UCD knew that if everyone, including homeowners, had to pay, their objections would kill the proposal. And because numerically, homeowners, not big landlords and developers, would control the decisionmaking process. By limiting the tax base to landlords, the corporate landlords could weed out the majority of those likely to object, could control the debate, and could control what projects the money could be spent on. I also believe that once a NID or BID was the law, it would eventually be expanded to residents. While this would require a change in the enabling legislation (would have to be presented to City Council again), the same pejoratives and labels (frugal, cheap the antis, etc) would then be applied to residents who objected. This isn't about a few dollars' tax: it's about power: the power to take and spend someone else's money, and the power of domination that that money can buy. Karen Allen From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related - Whoa Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:06:43 EDT In a message dated 6/26/07 11:34:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: as always, we need to be careful in public discourse to avoid resorting to ad hominem. the issue here is not about personalities or personal likes/dislikes but about public organizations and the public roles involved, about the public actions that were and were not taken while assuming those roles within those organizations, about public accountability. and in this case a man was suspended, publicly, and a seriouis rift of mistrust between ucd and blackwell's office, between ucd and the community, was deepened, publicly, under wendell's leadership. none of this happened as a result of ucd's director acting in a private or personal capacity. Oh, Ray, I think it IS about personalities; it's almost TOTALLY about personalities. Al Krigman and folks who share his viewpoint have been working to discredit the UCD in our eyes and the Councilwoman's eyes for several years now, because they don't want to pay $7 per apartment per month or less for a Business Improvement District. It's that simple, actually. Whenever the UCD held a meeting to get feedback and information to help refine and finalize the BID proposal, the antis shouted Lewis down and shouted BID supporters down, then complained afterwards that supporters were allowed to speak at all! - though they took to the podium one after another chanting NO NID!, made grossly misleading statements, and offered no suggestions or circumstances in which they'd be willing to pay anything at all. They booed supporters. They didn't LET UCD
Re: [UC] Crime Spree
Hi This also happened to at least one person today on 45th St between Sansom and Chestnut. There was a police car blocking the sidewalk while the officer was talking to an obviously upset and angry young man. The driver's side window was gone. Don't know what, if anything was taken. Considering this was done today while there was a large funeral going on at the Mosque on the corner of 45th and Walnut (and alot of people out on the sidewalks, etc.), whoever's responsible for that break-in is really brazen. Be careful out there, all! Wendy On 6/26/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FYI: Early this morning around 6 AM 6/26, on the 4700 block of Warrington Ave, 5 cars parked on the southside of the street were broken into, here we go again. The police were called and they responded. J. Valentino -- See what's free at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000503.
Re: [UC] UCD Related
speaking of D.L. Wormley, does anyone have her work email address? if so, please email it to me - I have a couple of housing questions relevant to her time at Penn. (D.L. Wormley used to run things like this. Great idea.) 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] UCD - clarifying the UCD/BID relationship
Why don't these people ever speak for themselves? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] UCD - clarifying the UCD/BID relationship Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:43:25 EDT But what's happening now, in this outcry of anger at the UCD, must be making the people who pay for the UCD itself pause. If the neighborhood doesn't want their free clean, safe and marketing efforts - what should they do? Might they feel it's better to get out of the hot seat and quietly go back inside their buildings and do nothing? Melani Lamond 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] UCD Related
Are you... are you serious? Is this for real? - Mike V. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kirk Wattles Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:50 PM To: UC List Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related The principle that UCD is, ultimately, accountable (only) to its funders is fine until you think about it for a moment. That's the same rationale as for a private militia, like in Lebanon. So where do we draw the line between UCD and Hezbollah? Obviously (!) there are differences, but these differences tend to fade when people insist that an organization that operates in a specific geographical space is responsible only to its supporters, and not to others living in the same space. That's why we have government, and processes for putting people in government and holding them accountable. I don't think it so strange that people on this list want to apply some of those principles (representation, transparency, accountability, etc.) to how UCD is run. On Jun 26, 2007, at 12:25 PM, Kyle Cassidy wrote: that ultimately UCD is accountable to it's funders. At the moment, that's not us. I agree that if we want to control the direction of UCD, then we need to be the ones paying for it. [...] UCD's a democracy of it's funders, it's just a question if we want to pony up what it takes to be part of the shareholders club. When you're paying the guy, you get to tell the guy what to do. I think it was Anthony West who was stressing that principle in some of his exchanges with Ray a few weeks ago. -- Kirk Wattles [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] UCD Related
I must correct this proposition, which cannot be entirely true as it stands. Anyone who shows up at a First Thursday meeting will meet representatives from three dozen agencies and associations that provide all sorts of services to all sorts of West Philadelphians. That's not a few local groups. Penn tries to funnel a broad spectrum of resources to all these groups, whose issues range from public safety, health, education and social services to culture and neighborhood planning ... they are far too diverse to pigeonhole. These groups are eager to partner with Penn; that is, they are always hopeful the largest economic and professional engine in their part of town can contribute something constructive to their communities. But it is ludicrous to describe them as coopted. If they were, indeed, coopted, why did they, by and large, offer Penn so little support at the last First Thursday meeting over the Fenton issue? It is normal for business partners to display some courtesy to each other when they are engaged in a long-term, mutually beneficial relationship, even if there are divergences of opinion at times. For reasons like these, senior KRF Apt. managers refrain from spray-painting comments like Yuppie JAP Snob! on their Penn-affiliated tenants' windows, even after acrimonious disputes over rental service. That doesn't mean KRF has been coopted by Penn; it is simply trying to be courteous and productive. Permit, then, other community institutions to relate to Penn with equal professionalism. It would be far more helpful, in my opinion, if critics of a particular community group's relationship with Penn would focus on that particular group and its particular inadequacies. If it is doing something wrong with Penn, spell out for all of us exactly what is wrong with what that group is doing. In other words: name names and cite facts. Ther may be a couple of local groups that have been unhealthily coopted by Penn. I don't work closely with any group that has been so coopted, but I'm willing to believe they exist. Which are they, and what shows they were coopted, i.e., persuaded to do something most people around here don't like, simply because Penn liked it? -- Tony West And the reason why transparency and participation should be the modus operandi is that Penn keeps touting its partnership with the community as if we're all in it together. The unpleasant reality is that Penn does what it pleases -- and co-opts a few local groups so it can make believe it has a partnership going. Always at your service ready for a dialog, Al Krigman
Re: [UC] UCD Related
Yes, I'm serious. I'm not saying that UCD *is* Hezbollah, but that if you follow the logic of what some people are saying about who gets to determine what UCD is and does, it could go that way -- and who could say any different? Only by bringing in some of the other principles can we have something to brake that tendency. But maybe Hezbollah isn't the best example. I'm remembering twenty years ago when the private militia were just getting more active in Lebanon. Hezbollah is an outgrowth of that period, and now of course they are now in government, and there are some checks and balances -- but barely. Last summer we saw an example of that one organization carrying on its own war, basically, without bearing responsibility to the wider community. - Kirk On Jun 26, 2007, at 4:59 PM, Mike V. wrote: Are you... are you serious? Is this for real? - Mike V. -Original Message- On Behalf Of Kirk Wattles So where do we draw the line between UCD and Hezbollah? It's not just a rhetorical question. Maybe that's how you misunderstand me. Where, in principle and in practice, do we draw the line? At what point do other principles become valid? UCD does benefit our community, I think most would agree, but if they're really only responsible to private interests then whether or not we approve is only incidental. So I conclude that really they *are* and *must be* responsible to the wider community, and then it becomes a question of how does the community participate effectively in that broader process. -- Kirk Wattles [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] UCD Related
How the crap did I turn into Earthlink on my own incoming email, simply because I switched my email account to Earthlink today? It's really unpleasant to get an email from yourself in which you call yourself Earthlink, even though you aren't. You know what I mean: the name in the From box. My god ... does this mean I too have been coopted? -- Tony West - Original Message - From: Earthlink To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:59 PM Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related I must correct this proposition, which cannot be entirely true as it stands. Anyone who shows up at a First Thursday meeting will meet representatives from three dozen agencies and associations that provide all sorts of services to all sorts of West Philadelphians. That's not a few local groups. Penn tries to funnel a broad spectrum of resources to all these groups, whose issues range from public safety, health, education and social services to culture and neighborhood planning ... they are far too diverse to pigeonhole. These groups are eager to partner with Penn; that is, they are always hopeful the largest economic and professional engine in their part of town can contribute something constructive to their communities. But it is ludicrous to describe them as coopted. If they were, indeed, coopted, why did they, by and large, offer Penn so little support at the last First Thursday meeting over the Fenton issue? It is normal for business partners to display some courtesy to each other when they are engaged in a long-term, mutually beneficial relationship, even if there are divergences of opinion at times. For reasons like these, senior KRF Apt. managers refrain from spray-painting comments like Yuppie JAP Snob! on their Penn-affiliated tenants' windows, even after acrimonious disputes over rental service. That doesn't mean KRF has been coopted by Penn; it is simply trying to be courteous and productive. Permit, then, other community institutions to relate to Penn with equal professionalism. It would be far more helpful, in my opinion, if critics of a particular community group's relationship with Penn would focus on that particular group and its particular inadequacies. If it is doing something wrong with Penn, spell out for all of us exactly what is wrong with what that group is doing. In other words: name names and cite facts. Ther may be a couple of local groups that have been unhealthily coopted by Penn. I don't work closely with any group that has been so coopted, but I'm willing to believe they exist. Which are they, and what shows they were coopted, i.e., persuaded to do something most people around here don't like, simply because Penn liked it? -- Tony West And the reason why transparency and participation should be the modus operandi is that Penn keeps touting its partnership with the community as if we're all in it together. The unpleasant reality is that Penn does what it pleases -- and co-opts a few local groups so it can make believe it has a partnership going. Always at your service ready for a dialog, Al Krigman
Re: [UC] So What's New?
Susan Jacobson wrote: Hello List, I am back from a month in Italy. Ahh, it was wonderful! But now I need to catch up after about a month of no Internet access. What's happenin' in the hood? What's this I hear about Duane from Abbraccio?? And, most importantly, *when* is the Farmer's Market at Clark Park? susan! where were you in italy? my friends and I are making nocino [no-CHEE-no], the italian walnut liqueur, made from green walnuts. you pick the young walnuts near the summer solstice, on st. john the baptist's day (june 24), steep them in alcohol/spices till the fall equinox, at which time you bottle it adjust for flavors, and then you drink it around christmas (winter solstice). recipe here: http://www.divinacucina.com/code/newsletter7.html woodlands has THE BEST walnut trees, and lots of them: http://tinyurl.com/33pvxc woodlands also has gentle graceful deer: http://tinyurl.com/yohf7z anyway, susan, we're not here to talk about nuts. we need your expertise about journalism around these parts. it seems that newspapers are where we'll find service organizations making damaging statements about our neighbors, and that local listservs are where we'll find an organization's official press releases. is this the new journalism or what? has the world gone all topsy-turvy, susan? .. 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] Proof that gentrification has run amok in the hood
Joshua Karstendick wrote: Speaking of gentrification, there was a hilarious article about it in the latest Onion: Shitty Neighborhood Rallies Against Asshole Developer. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/shitty_neighborhood_rallies Enjoy! UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think what's happening in our hood is gentrification, and so the parody's wasted in our case :-( (unless we've all openly agreed and ackowledged that penn is indeed an 'asshole developer'. is that the deal?) Dan Ohlemiller wrote: Yes. We all agree that Penn is an asshole developer. That's why the article is funny and relevant. haha yes. not only do we all agree that penn is an asshole developer, we also agree that I'm a working class loser, that my neighbors are poor benighted fucks and we all live in a pestilential hellhole. that's why the article is funny and relevant. .. 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] UCD Related
The principle that UCD is, ultimately, accountable (only) to its funders is fine until you think about it for a moment. That's the same rationale as for a private militia, like in Lebanon. So where do we draw the line between UCD and Hezbollah? Obviously (!) there are differences, but these differences tend to fade when people insist that an organization that operates in a specific geographical space is responsible only to its supporters, and not to others living in the same space. That's why we have government, and processes for putting people in government and holding them accountable. I don't think it so strange that people on this list want to apply some of those principles (representation, transparency, accountability, etc.) to how UCD is run. On Jun 26, 2007, at 12:25 PM, Kyle Cassidy wrote: that ultimately UCD is accountable to it's funders. At the moment, that's not us. I agree that if we want to control the direction of UCD, then we need to be the ones paying for it. [...] UCD's a democracy of it's funders, it's just a question if we want to pony up what it takes to be part of the shareholders club. When you're paying the guy, you get to tell the guy what to do. I think it was Anthony West who was stressing that principle in some of his exchanges with Ray a few weeks ago. -- Kirk Wattles [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] UCD Related - Hezbollah, private militias? OMG!
In a message dated 6/26/2007 5:26:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, I'm serious. I'm not saying that UCD *is* Hezbollah, but that if you follow the logic of what some people are saying about who gets to determine what UCD is and does, it could go that way -- and who could say any different? Only by bringing in some of the other principles can we have something to brake that tendency. But maybe Hezbollah isn't the best example. I'm remembering twenty years ago when the private militia were just getting more active in Lebanon. Hezbollah is an outgrowth of that period, and now of course they are now in government, and there are some checks and balances -- but barely. Last summer we saw an example of that one organization carrying on its own war, basically, without bearing responsibility to the wider community. I find your analogy, for its ability to polarize, stunningly inappropriate. If traditional modeling for insurgentcy organizing tactics are to be applied, the insurgents would more appropriately be The Anti-BID Party, who have yet to be awarded any seats from which to affect policy at the UCD's table of power. Power to the People! Craig Anti-BIDer's ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. inline: we're%20at%20war.jpg
Re: [UC] UCD Related
Tony (or should I say, Earthlink), You crack me up! That's it. your nickname from now on is Earthlink. Whenever I mention you on the list, it will by this new monicker. On 6/26/07, Earthlink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How the crap did I turn into Earthlink on my own incoming email, simply because I switched my email account to Earthlink today? It's really unpleasant to get an email from yourself in which you call yourself Earthlink, even though you aren't. You know what I mean: the name in the From box. My god ... does this mean I too have been coopted? -- Tony West - Original Message - *From:* Earthlink [EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* UnivCity@list.purple.com *Sent:* Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:59 PM *Subject:* Re: [UC] UCD Related I must correct this proposition, which cannot be entirely true as it stands. Anyone who shows up at a First Thursday meeting will meet representatives from three dozen agencies and associations that provide all sorts of services to all sorts of West Philadelphians. That's not a few local groups. Penn tries to funnel a broad spectrum of resources to all these groups, whose issues range from public safety, health, education and social services to culture and neighborhood planning ... they are far too diverse to pigeonhole. These groups are eager to partner with Penn; that is, they are always hopeful the largest economic and professional engine in their part of town can contribute something constructive to their communities. But it is ludicrous to describe them as coopted. If they were, indeed, coopted, why did they, by and large, offer Penn so little support at the last First Thursday meeting over the Fenton issue? It is normal for business partners to display some courtesy to each other when they are engaged in a long-term, mutually beneficial relationship, even if there are divergences of opinion at times. For reasons like these, senior KRF Apt. managers refrain from spray-painting comments like Yuppie JAP Snob! on their Penn-affiliated tenants' windows, even after acrimonious disputes over rental service. That doesn't mean KRF has been coopted by Penn; it is simply trying to be courteous and productive. Permit, then, other community institutions to relate to Penn with equal professionalism. It would be far more helpful, in my opinion, if critics of a particular community group's relationship with Penn would focus on that particular group and its particular inadequacies. If it is doing something wrong with Penn, spell out for all of us exactly what is wrong with what that group is doing. In other words: name names and cite facts. Ther may be a couple of local groups that have been unhealthily coopted by Penn. I don't work closely with any group that has been so coopted, but I'm willing to believe they exist. Which are they, and what shows they were coopted, i.e., persuaded to do something most people around here don't like, simply because Penn liked it? -- Tony West And the reason why transparency and participation should be the modus operandi is that Penn keeps touting its partnership with the community as if we're all in it together. The unpleasant reality is that Penn does what it pleases -- and co-opts a few local groups so it can make believe it has a partnership going. Always at your service ready for a dialog, Al Krigman
Re: [UC] UCD Related - Earthlink
In a message dated 6/26/2007 5:53:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You crack me up! That's it. your nickname from now on is Earthlink. Whenever I mention you on the list, it will by this new monicker. Disconnect his Link; let's see where he goes. ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [UC] So What's New?
Ray - I was teaching in a small town called Cagli, which is in the Marche region. I was lucky enough to have the opportunity to travel to Venice, Florence and Urbino while I was there, and I spent a day in Rome. Italy is fabulous - I would recommend it to anyone who is considering a European vacation. The people are friendly, the food is great, the whole country is beautiful and the prices are pretty reasonable. I did not get a chance to try nocino, but I was introduced to the experience that is Limoncella. ;-) As to journalismall I can say is that it is changing. No one knows for sure what the future looks like - print, online, advocacy journalism, objective journalism, text, images, or IMs. Chances are that if one press outlet is supporting one perspective (UCD is a good thing) another outlet is supporting the other (UCD is the asshole developer). Cheers! sj Original message Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:33:30 -0400 From: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] So What's New? To: University City List UnivCity@list.purple.com Susan Jacobson wrote: Hello List, I am back from a month in Italy. Ahh, it was wonderful! But now I need to catch up after about a month of no Internet access. What's happenin' in the hood? What's this I hear about Duane from Abbraccio?? And, most importantly, *when* is the Farmer's Market at Clark Park? susan! where were you in italy? my friends and I are making nocino [no-CHEE-no], the italian walnut liqueur, made from green walnuts. you pick the young walnuts near the summer solstice, on st. john the baptist's day (june 24), steep them in alcohol/spices till the fall equinox, at which time you bottle it adjust for flavors, and then you drink it around christmas (winter solstice). recipe here: http://www.divinacucina.com/code/newsletter7.html woodlands has THE BEST walnut trees, and lots of them: http://tinyurl.com/33pvxc woodlands also has gentle graceful deer: http://tinyurl.com/yohf7z anyway, susan, we're not here to talk about nuts. we need your expertise about journalism around these parts. it seems that newspapers are where we'll find service organizations making damaging statements about our neighbors, and that local listservs are where we'll find an organization's official press releases. is this the new journalism or what? has the world gone all topsy-turvy, susan? .. 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. Susan Jacobson, PhD Department of Journalism Temple University [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] UCD Related
I'm thinking we've found a new variation of Godwin's Law? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Mike V. Sent: Tue 6/26/2007 4:59 PM To: 'Kirk Wattles'; 'UC List' Subject: RE: [UC] UCD Related Are you... are you serious? Is this for real? - Mike V. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kirk Wattles Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:50 PM To: UC List Subject: Re: [UC] UCD Related The principle that UCD is, ultimately, accountable (only) to its funders is fine until you think about it for a moment. That's the same rationale as for a private militia, like in Lebanon. So where do we draw the line between UCD and Hezbollah? Obviously (!) there are differences, but these differences tend to fade when people insist that an organization that operates in a specific geographical space is responsible only to its supporters, and not to others living in the same space. That's why we have government, and processes for putting people in government and holding them accountable. I don't think it so strange that people on this list want to apply some of those principles (representation, transparency, accountability, etc.) to how UCD is run. On Jun 26, 2007, at 12:25 PM, Kyle Cassidy wrote: that ultimately UCD is accountable to it's funders. At the moment, that's not us. I agree that if we want to control the direction of UCD, then we need to be the ones paying for it. [...] UCD's a democracy of it's funders, it's just a question if we want to pony up what it takes to be part of the shareholders club. When you're paying the guy, you get to tell the guy what to do. I think it was Anthony West who was stressing that principle in some of his exchanges with Ray a few weeks ago. -- Kirk Wattles [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.
