[UC] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Tony, I am speaking of those who have been a part of all UC community Associations for at least the past 15 years who have had a hand in the directing the tone of the neighborhood who are at the forefront of latest skirmish with citizens about the Campus Inn. As Ray stated earlier they have also traditionally formed sub-community groups whenever things haven't gone quite their way, such as the various and sundry Friends groups. To this you might insert many names and more I cannot think of right now. To wit, The Friends of The: a) Firehouse Market b) Woodlands c) Calvary Church d) UCD e) Clark Park f) 40th St. The common thread is these groups form when there is direct opposition by community members to a project which they favor, or the way those in charge would like things done. It would be foolhardy to place the focus on current officers in February 2009, when they have essentially inherited a legacy of hard feelings from the various community group versus the community skirmishes. As I see it many of those who formerly these spin-off ³Friends² groups, find themselves quite without friends (from the traditional sources to whom they have lent support) as this project steam rollers their way. I have been in the inner circle as you say, of several UC community organizations and am intimately acquainted as to how they function. During several of the above Friends engagements, I was record keeper. There is no need for a study here. The modus operandii has not changed, except for perhaps a few new faces. The greatest changes is at whom this M.O. it is directed unfortunately. -W On 2/9/09 8:46 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: Wilma, You are right, SHCA and UCHS have big internal political work to do right now after the tough public decision that split their memberships. Been there, done that. Let them go about that business then, if you're a member. If you're not a current member, now is a sweet time to join such a group! New volunteers and returning dropouts are welcomed eagerly into the Association's inner circle, because half the previous leaders were just taken out by a mortar hit. Newbies can have a major impact in moments like these. You may be right, for all I know, about the leaders of community associations backing the Campus Inn. So why don't we find out? How many officers, as of February 2009, have self-serving Penn connections? Let's take a poll. First, you decide on a list of community organizations you're going to include in your study. Then you decide on a range of job titles you're going to include. Then you decide on which Penn interactions will count as self-serving and which won't. Then you start measuring. I'd suggest you distinguish officers from directors and count only officers. That's not because directors can't be backstage Richelieus manipulating the front guys; it's strictly a matter of work time. A typical Association may have 5 officers and 20 directors. So if you want a good sample of Associations in this neighborhood, it'll cost you too much to track down and call all their directors. If you want to organize this task, Wilma, I'll volunteer to do 20% of the phonework. -- Tony West I won't begin to speak for Karen, but MY take on what she wrote is that quite a few (not all), of the alleged Campus Inn supporters have been positing themselves as leaders of community associations and institutions, to which many of us belong or have belonged. All the while they have been using their credibility as community activists and representatives for self-serving purposes with, as you put it, the economic engine of Penn, while spinning another agenda to the community they purported to represent to keep others working and engaged. The most egregious is my opinion is the organizations who claim to want to preserve the historical integrity of the neighborhood, while their friends neighbors and members vehemently oppose this project. It also must be hurtful that so many of the neighbors immediately around this project have put many hours, years and dollars working in these community groups who ultimately failed to advocate their interest. Granted, there will proponents and opponents on any issue that concerns the community. Disqualifying people from supporting it doesn't quite ring true for me. Rather, a sense of betrayal is felt by those who believed these community leaders actually stood for what they said they did. -Wilma 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
RE: As Ray stated earlier they have also traditionally formed sub-community groups whenever things haven't gone quite their way, such as the various and sundry Friends groups. To this you might insert many names and more I cannot think of right now. To wit, The Friends of The: a) Firehouse Market b) Woodlands... Hi, Wilma, Yes, you're absolutely right about the various Friends groups that have sprung up over the years. When you think about it, the existance of these groups carried different messages at different levels. Especially in the situations where there were already organized structures in place (the Firehouse Market and its Board comes immediately to mind), it first implied that the elected Board was not valid or representative, but that a self-selected Friends group was. It also begged the question: if the self selected group were The Friends, what did that make the official Board of Directors...The Enemies??? Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 07:42:26 -0500 Subject: [UC] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor From: wil.p...@verizon.net To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Tony, I am speaking of those who have been a part of all UC community Associations for at least the past 15 years who have had a hand in the directing the tone of the neighborhood who are at the forefront of latest skirmish with citizens about the Campus Inn. As Ray stated earlier they have also traditionally formed sub-community groups whenever things haven't gone quite their way, such as the various and sundry Friends groups. To this you might insert many names and more I cannot think of right now. To wit, The Friends of The: a) Firehouse Market b) Woodlands c) Calvary Church d) UCD e) Clark Park f) 40th St. The common thread is these groups form when there is direct opposition by community members to a project which they favor, or the way those in charge would like things done. It would be foolhardy to place the focus on current officers in February 2009, when they have essentially inherited a legacy of hard feelings from the various community group versus the community skirmishes. As I see it many of those who formerly these spin-off ³Friends² groups, find themselves quite without friends (from the traditional sources to whom they have lent support) as this project steam rollers their way. I have been in the inner circle as you say, of several UC community organizations and am intimately acquainted as to how they function. During several of the above Friends engagements, I was record keeper. There is no need for a study here. The modus operandii has not changed, except for perhaps a few new faces. The greatest changes is at whom this M.O. it is directed unfortunately. -W On 2/9/09 8:46 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: Wilma,You are right, SHCA and UCHS have big internal political work to do right now after the tough public decision that split their memberships. Been there, done that. Let them go about that business then, if you're a member.If you're not a current member, now is a sweet time to join such a group! New volunteers and returning dropouts are welcomed eagerly into the Association's inner circle, because half the previous leaders were just taken out by a mortar hit. Newbies can have a major impact in moments like these.You may be right, for all I know, about the leaders of community associations backing the Campus Inn. So why don't we find out? How many officers, as of February 2009, have self-serving Penn connections? Let's take a poll. First, you decide on a list of community organizations you're going to include in your study. Then you decide on a range of job titles you're going to include. Then you decide on which Penn interactions will count as self-serving and which won't. Then you start measuring.I'd suggest you distinguish officers from directors and count only officers. That's not because directors can't be backstage Richelieus manipulating the front guys; it's strictly a matter of work time. A typical Association may have 5 officers and 20 directors. So if you want a good sample of Associations in this neighborhood, it'll cost you too much to track down and call all their directors.If you want to organize this task, Wilma, I'll volunteer to do 20% of the phonework.-- Tony West I won't begin to speak for Karen, but MY take on what she wrote is that quite a few (not all), of the alleged Campus Inn supporters have been positing themselves as leaders of community associations and institutions, to which many of us belong or have belonged.All the while they have been using their credibility as community activists and representatives for self-serving purposes with, as you put it, the economic engine of Penn, while spinning another agenda to the community they purported to represent to keep others working
RE: [UC] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Hi, Wilma, I think you accurately summed up my arguments, and eloquently expanded upon them as well. Thanks. Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 17:30:12 -0500 Subject: Re: [UC] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor From: wil.p...@verizon.net To: anthony_w...@earthlink.net; univcity@list.purple.com Tony, I won't begin to speak for Karen, but MY take on what she wrote is that quite a few (not all), of the alleged Campus Inn supporters have been positing themselves as leaders of community associations and institutions, to which many of us belong or have belonged. All the while they have been using their credibility as community activists and representatives for self-serving purposes with, as you put it, the economic engine of Penn, while spinning another agenda to the community they purported to represent to keep others working and engaged. The most egregious is my opinion is the organizations who claim to want to preserve the historical integrity of the neighborhood, while their friends neighbors and members vehemently oppose this project. It also must be hurtful that so many of the neighbors immediately around this project have put many hours, years and dollars working in these community groups who ultimately failed to advocate their interest. Granted, there will proponents and opponents on any issue that concerns the community. Disqualifying people from supporting it doesn't quite ring true for me. Rather, a sense of betrayal is felt by those who believed these community leaders actually stood for what they said they did. Karen can correct me if I have misspoke any of her arguments here and you may do the same. -Wilma On 2/9/09 4:13 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: This is a real concern. Indeed, it has to haunt any attempt to foster community institutions in University City. Many people don't feel the town-gown process has been well handled in a lot of cases.But the issue is deucedly complex.Given the size of Penn the economic engine, lots of people in UC are bound to do business with Penn. So ruling all people out of public discussion who have Penn connections would give a bizarre and lopsided look to any neighborhood debate, wouldn't it?To be neutral, one would have to dismiss all Penn-affiliated neighbors *on both sides* of a debate about Penn. You can't have a situation where disgruntled Penn affiliates are applauded as oracles when they attack Penn, while contented affiliates are disqualified from speaking up for it. In truth, I know many real-estate agents and property owners who freely oppose the Campus Inn. So there has to be a way for other real-estate agents and property owners to freely support it, if that desire should enter their hearts.-- Tony WestKAREN ALLEN wrote: That's where our neighbors who feed at the Penn trough come into play on behalf of Penn. It would seem that few people think (or, at least, will say out loud) that it seems odd that the most strident and outspoken supporters of Penn Real Estate's hotel proposal just happen to be mostly real estate agents and large property owners who rent to Penn students. Nor does it seem to be odd that those self-same real estate agents, property owners, and the hotel developer were the same people who all somehow ended up being named to the steering committee which tried to get Penn's UCD BID proposal passed into law. Now it's been revealed that a local community association has had board members quit in disgust over its zoning committee seemingly ignoring their members' loud and clear objections to the hotel.All of this is to say that the community can be hijacked by those with self interests who are willing to throw the actual community under the Penn bus. Pay no attention to my blatant conflicts of interest, and to near-unanimous opposition from everyone else. I am the Community, and I am here to rubberstamp anything Penn wants! 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Wilma, Sorry but there is a need for me and, I suspect, for many other neighbors who are not as well versed as you are in these groups' history. The only Friends of group I know well is Clark Park. In that case the group sprang up in the mid-'70s to oppose the hijacking of a beloved statue by Fairmount Park. It was completely grass-roots in origin and has remained so to this day. It was not formed by another community Association when things haven't gone quite their way. One of its founding Board Members, Fran Byers, has sat continuously on its Board until this very day, so I have an excellent information source. You may be right about the other five groups. Wilma, Karen, anybody? -- Which community Associations founded Friends of the Firehouse Market, Friends of Woodlands Cemetery, Friends of Calvary Church, Friends of UCD and Friends of 40th St.? I don't think some of these groups are even called Friends of ... anything. Maybe they are five very different critters. But if they were, in fact, founded as sub-community groups by community Associations who, for some reason, couldn't get what they wanted by acting in their own name ... then people who know that history should name the founder groups, and also explain why they had to start a side-group, to accomplish what end. -- Tony West I am speaking of those who have been a part of all UC community Associations for *at least the past 15 years* who have had a hand in the directing the tone of the neighborhood who are at the forefront of latest skirmish with citizens about the Campus Inn. As Ray stated earlier they have also traditionally formed sub-community groups whenever things haven't gone quite their way, such as the various and sundry Friends groups. To this you might insert many names and more I cannot think of right now. To wit, The Friends of The: a) Firehouse Market b) Woodlands c) Calvary Church d) UCD e) Clark Park f) 40th St. The common thread is these groups form when there is direct opposition by community members to a project which they favor, or the way those in charge would like things done. I have been in the inner circle as you say, of several UC community organizations and am intimately acquainted as to how they function. During several of the above Friends engagements, I was record keeper. There is no need for a study here. The modus operandii has not changed, except for perhaps a few new faces. The greatest changes is at whom this M.O. it is directed unfortunately. -W 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Tony, Perhaps I have erroneously included The Friends of Clark Park amongst the various and sundry Friends spin-offs; but therein lies the rub. As you stated, to YOUR knowledge this group was not created in response to drive other established community groups' agendas when things have not gone quite their way. You may be quite right about that particular group. Still, there are community members who have joined the established UC community organizations over the years, who have pledged many hours/years and personal funds, and even slightly neglected their own families and relationships to support neighborhood issues their very credible community leaders charged them to do. There are also those, old and newly recruited, who have given their all for various Friends Of groups who perhaps felt the same as you do. The point is now many of those who have served faithfully are now without the powerful UC Community organizations backed Friends to advocate for them. The hurting thing is the opposing community members to this hotel project are desperately trying to uphold the original vision of the established UC leaders and community organizations they represent. Now they find themselves at cross purposes. Any human, even if they do not agree, should understand their sense of betrayal. Tweaking noses on this listserv one does not negate the efforts and costs of our neighbors spent in service to this community just because Penn is a big economic machine. -W On 2/10/09 6:16 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: Wilma, Sorry but there is a need for me and, I suspect, for many other neighbors who are not as well versed as you are in these groups' history. The only Friends of group I know well is Clark Park. In that case the group sprang up in the mid-'70s to oppose the hijacking of a beloved statue by Fairmount Park. It was completely grass-roots in origin and has remained so to this day. It was not formed by another community Association when things haven't gone quite their way. One of its founding Board Members, Fran Byers, has sat continuously on its Board until this very day, so I have an excellent information source. You may be right about the other five groups. Wilma, Karen, anybody? -- Which community Associations founded Friends of the Firehouse Market, Friends of Woodlands Cemetery, Friends of Calvary Church, Friends of UCD and Friends of 40th St.? I don't think some of these groups are even called Friends of ... anything. Maybe they are five very different critters. But if they were, in fact, founded as sub-community groups by community Associations who, for some reason, couldn't get what they wanted by acting in their own name ... then people who know that history should name the founder groups, and also explain why they had to start a side-group, to accomplish what end. -- Tony West I am speaking of those who have been a part of all UC community Associations for *at least the past 15 years* who have had a hand in the directing the tone of the neighborhood who are at the forefront of latest skirmish with citizens about the Campus Inn. As Ray stated earlier they have also traditionally formed sub-community groups whenever things haven't gone quite their way, such as the various and sundry Friends groups. To this you might insert many names and more I cannot think of right now. To wit, The Friends of The: a) Firehouse Market b) Woodlands c) Calvary Church d) UCD e) Clark Park f) 40th St. The common thread is these groups form when there is direct opposition by community members to a project which they favor, or the way those in charge would like things done. I have been in the inner circle as you say, of several UC community organizations and am intimately acquainted as to how they function. During several of the above Friends engagements, I was record keeper. There is no need for a study here. The modus operandii has not changed, except for perhaps a few new faces. The greatest changes is at whom this M.O. it is directed unfortunately. -W 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Joe Clarke wrote: This relationship precedes Nutter's administration and will probably succeed it as well. Penn's School of Education has produced at least one -- Connie Clayton -- head of the school board. I know that the city's Human Resource database, SOS, was built by Penn. The BRT database was also a co project with the University's social work, urban planning, etc.. There are probably dozens of other links to the city--why wouldn't there be. To have that much expertise a half mile west, you'd have to be out of your mind not to use it. However, I'd like to see the city be less beholdin' to one institution that already has enough money to consider putting tanning booths in each dorm room in order to achieve a more diverse student body. I'd like to see them mix it up a bit. Get some of the other schools involved. Don't just go to Penn each time you need an expert on ethics, genetics, faith-based initiatives (this is laughable), on and on. Penn wants to guard its place at the funding trough (Penn is often the distributor-of-choice for funds to the area, the local agent, for which it gets a hefty administrative fee). Penn positions itself to benefit Penn and there's no better way than to be up to your nose in political access. The community is also Penn's petri dish for social programs and other government initiatives to help out the community. No doubt, Penn does good for some, but it is always on Penn's terms, as it positions itself to be in the front of the line when the ole funding spigot gets turned and that vital replenishing liquidity comes gushing forth and streaming down over them like lucre's holy sacrament (secular alleluia's are appropriate here). In the meantime the community beneficiaries get to be close by when all that comes rushing through, where even the spray is enough to revive a program for the next funding year. Amen agreed, joe. and while it's questionable enough for penn to interfere, as a private entity, with the waterfront development, with businesses along 40th street, or with the kimmel center re-do, it's even more questionable for penn to interfere with decision-making about city budgets. especially when penn does not offer concomitant expertise on how taxpaying voters can hold penn agencies (and their creations) accountable. example: penn praxis on 40th street http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/40th/ UNACCOUNTABLE the praxis-delivered principles for 40th street run counter to the proposed hotel. principles like: small-scale retail values of the community commerce and culture reflecting the surrounding neighborhood reduced energy consumption continued consultation, communication, dialogue and promotion and yet it is the friends of 40th street who are held responsible for these principles. (by whom?) NON-TRANSPARENT the meeting minutes of the praxis-created friends disappear from the website in oct 2007, and never mention the hotel (the story of the hotel broke publicly in the uc review oct 2007). and yet it is the friends of 40th street who are held responsible for 'communication.' (by whom?) will this model (where penn frames the dialog and creates non-accountable, non-transparent friends), be applied to philadelphia's budget decision-making? to what extent will nutter be accountable? not accountable? .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
As far as this is concerned: the praxis-delivered principles for 40th street run counter to the proposed hotel. principles like: values of the community commerce and culture reflecting the surrounding neighborhoodThat's where our neighbors who feed at the Penn trough come into play on behalf of Penn. It would seem that few people think (or, at least, will say out loud) that it seems odd that the most strident and outspoken supporters of Penn Real Estate's hotel proposal just happen to be mostly real estate agents and large property owners who rent to Penn students. Nor does it seem to be odd that those self-same real estate agents, property owners, and the hotel developer were the same people who all somehow ended up being named to the steering committee which tried to get Penn's UCD BID proposal passed into law. Now it's been revealed that a local community association has had board members quit in disgust over its zoning committee seemingly ignoring their members' loud and clear objections to the hotel. All of this is to say that the community can be hijacked by those with self interests who are willing to throw the actual community under the Penn bus. Pay no attention to my blatant conflicts of interest, and to near-unanimous opposition from everyone else. I am the Community, and I am here to rubberstamp anything Penn wants! Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 12:04:40 -0500 From: laserb...@speedymail.org To: univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor Joe Clarke wrote: This relationship precedes Nutter's administration and will probably succeed it as well. Penn's School of Education has produced at least one -- Connie Clayton -- head of the school board. I know that the city's Human Resource database, SOS, was built by Penn. The BRT database was also a co project with the University's social work, urban planning, etc.. There are probably dozens of other links to the city--why wouldn't there be. To have that much expertise a half mile west, you'd have to be out of your mind not to use it. However, I'd like to see the city be less beholdin' to one institution that already has enough money to consider putting tanning booths in each dorm room in order to achieve a more diverse student body. I'd like to see them mix it up a bit. Get some of the other schools involved. Don't just go to Penn each time you need an expert on ethics, genetics, faith-based initiatives (this is laughable), on and on. Penn wants to guard its place at the funding trough (Penn is often the distributor-of-choice for funds to the area, the local agent, for which it gets a hefty administrative fee). Penn positions itself to benefit Penn and there's no better way than to be up to your nose in political access. The community is also Penn's petri dish for social programs and other government initiatives to help out the community. No doubt, Penn does good for some, but it is always on Penn's terms, as it positions itself to be in the front of the line when the ole funding spigot gets turned and that vital replenishing liquidity comes gushing forth and streaming down over them like lucre's holy sacrament (secular alleluia's are appropriate here). In the meantime the community beneficiaries get to be close by when all that comes rushing through, where even the spray is enough to revive a program for the next funding year. Amen agreed, joe. and while it's questionable enough for penn to interfere, as a private entity, with the waterfront development, with businesses along 40th street, or with the kimmel center re-do, it's even more questionable for penn to interfere with decision-making about city budgets. especially when penn does not offer concomitant expertise on how taxpaying voters can hold penn agencies (and their creations) accountable. example: penn praxis on 40th street http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/40th/ UNACCOUNTABLE the praxis-delivered principles for 40th street run counter to the proposed hotel. principles like: small-scale retail values of the community commerce and culture reflecting the surrounding neighborhood reduced energy consumption continued consultation, communication, dialogue and promotion and yet it is the friends of 40th street who are held responsible for these principles. (by whom?) NON-TRANSPARENT the meeting minutes of the praxis-created friends disappear from the website in oct 2007, and never mention the hotel (the story of the hotel broke publicly in the uc review oct 2007). and yet it is the friends of 40th street who are held responsible for 'communication.' (by whom?) will this model (where penn frames the dialog and creates non-accountable, non-transparent friends), be applied to philadelphia's budget decision-making? to what extent will nutter be accountable
Re: [UC] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
It would be wrong for Penn to interfere with waterfront development. However, it is normal for PennPraxis and many other private entities to facilitate waterfront development. In fact, no waterfront planning ever takes place without public-private partnerships, because both port and development economies necessarily operate at a public-private interface. agreed, joe. and while it's questionable enough for penn to interfere, as a private entity, with the waterfront development, with businesses along 40th street, or with the kimmel center re-do, it's even more questionable for penn to interfere with decision-making about city budgets. especially when penn does not offer concomitant expertise on how taxpaying voters can hold penn agencies (and their creations) accountable. example: penn praxis on 40th street http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/40th/ As for Friends of 40th Street's Planning Principles, read more carefully, Ray. UNACCOUNTABLE the praxis-delivered principles for 40th street run counter to the proposed hotel. principles like: small-scale retail The Principles give give a mix of uses, such as residential living above small-scale retail, as one example of how development might proceed. They don't say development must be restricted to this model. values of the community ...so that street life reflects the values of the community. This neighborhood, with its high rate of visitors, doesn't have a value set that is opposed to visiting out-of-towners on its sidewalk, does it? commerce and culture reflecting the surrounding neighborhood which neighborhood contains several large universities and hospitals that attract out-of-town visitors reduced energy consumption Campus Inn claims to be designed to achieve a LEED Silver rating, with green roof and all continued consultation, communication, dialogue and promotion Fo40St holds regular monthly meetings. Meetings, not websites, are the trenches of communication. NON-TRANSPARENT the meeting minutes of the praxis-created friends disappear from the website in oct 2007, and never mention the hotel (the story of the hotel broke publicly in the uc review oct 2007). and yet it is the friends of 40th street who are held responsible for 'communication.' (by whom?) So go to a meeting. Or call them and ask them to update their website. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN Your argument against PennPraxis follows exactly the same logic as that of the guy who is angry that the Police never come when you call 911, even though, in his case, he never bothers to call them in the first place, because he already knows they won't come anyway. He might be right about the Police, and you might be right about PennPraxis. But your prejudice cannot function as evidence of its own rightness. You actually have to try to use a system, before you can cite evidence that system won't work for you. -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
This is a real concern. Indeed, it has to haunt any attempt to foster community institutions in University City. Many people don't feel the town-gown process has been well handled in a lot of cases. But the issue is deucedly complex. Given the size of Penn the economic engine, lots of people in UC are bound to do business with Penn. So ruling all people out of public discussion who have Penn connections would give a bizarre and lopsided look to any neighborhood debate, wouldn't it? To be neutral, one would have to dismiss all Penn-affiliated neighbors *on both sides* of a debate about Penn. You can't have a situation where disgruntled Penn affiliates are applauded as oracles when they attack Penn, while contented affiliates are disqualified from speaking up for it. In truth, I know many real-estate agents and property owners who freely oppose the Campus Inn. So there has to be a way for other real-estate agents and property owners to freely support it, if that desire should enter their hearts. -- Tony West KAREN ALLEN wrote: That's where our neighbors who feed at the Penn trough come into play on behalf of Penn. It would seem that few people think (or, at least, will say out loud) that it seems odd that the most strident and outspoken supporters of Penn Real Estate's hotel proposal just happen to be mostly real estate agents and large property owners who rent to Penn students. Nor does it seem to be odd that those self-same real estate agents, property owners, and the hotel developer were the same people who all somehow ended up being named to the steering committee which tried to get Penn's UCD BID proposal passed into law. Now it's been revealed that a local community association has had board members quit in disgust over its zoning committee seemingly ignoring their members' loud and clear objections to the hotel. All of this is to say that the community can be hijacked by those with self interests who are willing to throw the actual community under the Penn bus. Pay no attention to my blatant conflicts of interest, and to near-unanimous opposition from everyone else. I am the Community, and I am here to rubberstamp anything Penn wants! 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Tony, I won't begin to speak for Karen, but MY take on what she wrote is that quite a few (not all), of the alleged Campus Inn supporters have been positing themselves as leaders of community associations and institutions, to which many of us belong or have belonged. All the while they have been using their credibility as community activists and representatives for self-serving purposes with, as you put it, the economic engine of Penn, while spinning another agenda to the community they purported to represent to keep others working and engaged. The most egregious is my opinion is the organizations who claim to want to preserve the historical integrity of the neighborhood, while their friends neighbors and members vehemently oppose this project. It also must be hurtful that so many of the neighbors immediately around this project have put many hours, years and dollars working in these community groups who ultimately failed to advocate their interest. Granted, there will proponents and opponents on any issue that concerns the community. Disqualifying people from supporting it doesn't quite ring true for me. Rather, a sense of betrayal is felt by those who believed these community leaders actually stood for what they said they did. Karen can correct me if I have misspoke any of her arguments here and you may do the same. -Wilma On 2/9/09 4:13 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: This is a real concern. Indeed, it has to haunt any attempt to foster community institutions in University City. Many people don't feel the town-gown process has been well handled in a lot of cases. But the issue is deucedly complex. Given the size of Penn the economic engine, lots of people in UC are bound to do business with Penn. So ruling all people out of public discussion who have Penn connections would give a bizarre and lopsided look to any neighborhood debate, wouldn't it? To be neutral, one would have to dismiss all Penn-affiliated neighbors *on both sides* of a debate about Penn. You can't have a situation where disgruntled Penn affiliates are applauded as oracles when they attack Penn, while contented affiliates are disqualified from speaking up for it. In truth, I know many real-estate agents and property owners who freely oppose the Campus Inn. So there has to be a way for other real-estate agents and property owners to freely support it, if that desire should enter their hearts. -- Tony West KAREN ALLEN wrote: That's where our neighbors who feed at the Penn trough come into play on behalf of Penn. It would seem that few people think (or, at least, will say out loud) that it seems odd that the most strident and outspoken supporters of Penn Real Estate's hotel proposal just happen to be mostly real estate agents and large property owners who rent to Penn students. Nor does it seem to be odd that those self-same real estate agents, property owners, and the hotel developer were the same people who all somehow ended up being named to the steering committee which tried to get Penn's UCD BID proposal passed into law. Now it's been revealed that a local community association has had board members quit in disgust over its zoning committee seemingly ignoring their members' loud and clear objections to the hotel. All of this is to say that the community can be hijacked by those with self interests who are willing to throw the actual community under the Penn bus. Pay no attention to my blatant conflicts of interest, and to near-unanimous opposition from everyone else. I am the Community, and I am here to rubberstamp anything Penn wants! 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Wilma, You are right, SHCA and UCHS have big internal political work to do right now after the tough public decision that split their memberships. Been there, done that. Let them go about that business then, if you're a member. If you're not a current member, now is a sweet time to join such a group! New volunteers and returning dropouts are welcomed eagerly into the Association's inner circle, because half the previous leaders were just taken out by a mortar hit. Newbies can have a major impact in moments like these. You may be right, for all I know, about the leaders of community associations backing the Campus Inn. So why don't we find out? How many officers, as of February 2009, have self-serving Penn connections? Let's take a poll. First, you decide on a list of community organizations you're going to include in your study. Then you decide on a range of job titles you're going to include. Then you decide on which Penn interactions will count as self-serving and which won't. Then you start measuring. I'd suggest you distinguish officers from directors and count only officers. That's not because directors can't be backstage Richelieus manipulating the front guys; it's strictly a matter of work time. A typical Association may have 5 officers and 20 directors. So if you want a good sample of Associations in this neighborhood, it'll cost you too much to track down and call all their directors. If you want to organize this task, Wilma, I'll volunteer to do 20% of the phonework. -- Tony West I won't begin to speak for Karen, but MY take on what she wrote is that quite a few (not all), of the alleged Campus Inn supporters have been positing themselves as leaders of community associations and institutions, to which many of us belong or have belonged. All the while they have been using their credibility as community activists and representatives for self-serving purposes with, as you put it, the economic engine of Penn, while spinning another agenda to the community they purported to represent to keep others working and engaged. The most egregious is my opinion is the organizations who claim to want to preserve the historical integrity of the neighborhood, while their friends neighbors and members vehemently oppose this project. It also must be hurtful that so many of the neighbors immediately around this project have put many hours, years and dollars working in these community groups who ultimately failed to advocate their interest. Granted, there will proponents and opponents on any issue that concerns the community. Disqualifying people from supporting it doesn't quite ring true for me. Rather, a sense of betrayal is felt by those who believed these community leaders actually stood for what they said they did. -Wilma 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
KAREN ALLEN wrote: As far as this is concerned: the praxis-delivered principles for 40th street run counter to the proposed hotel. principles like: values of the community commerce and culture reflecting the surrounding neighborhoodThat's where our neighbors who feed at the Penn trough come into play on behalf of Penn. It would seem that few people think (or, at least, will say out loud) that it seems odd that the most strident and outspoken supporters of Penn Real Estate's hotel proposal just happen to be mostly real estate agents and large property owners who rent to Penn students. Nor does it seem to be odd that those self-same real estate agents, property owners, and the hotel developer were the same people who all somehow ended up being named to the steering committee which tried to get Penn's UCD BID proposal passed into law. Now it's been revealed that a local community association has had board members quit in disgust over its zoning committee seemingly ignoring their members' loud and clear objections t o the hotel. All of this is to say that the community can be hijacked by those with self interests who are willing to throw the actual community under the Penn bus. Pay no attention to my blatant conflicts of interest, and to near-unanimous opposition from everyone else. I am the Community, and I am here to rubberstamp anything Penn wants! yes. our neighborhood associations can hijack the community and be hijacked by penn interests; meanwhile penn can invent 'surrogate' neighborhood associations for us. these are the pseudo 'community engagement' groups (like 'friends of 40th street'), spawned by the likes of penn praxis -- groups (or forums or workshops etc) which not only frame the terms of the engagement and its outcomes, but also give the appearance that public debate and deliberation have taken place and that communication and dialog are continuing. unfortunately, as we've seen so close at hand with 'friends of 40th street', there are no accompanying mechanisms to ensure accountability or transparency or continued communication -- no matter which side one is on in any given issue! rather than serve or empower or engage citizens, these groups, like the neighborhood associations, ultimately serve only to give the appearance of community engagement. meanwhile the power entities do what they want; in the case of 40th street penn builds and develops whatever penn wants to build and develop, shca's zoning committee decides zoning questions however shca's zoning committee wants. and at the end of the day, no one is accountable, yet everyone is 'engaged'. and I was asking joe if this model is what we can expect with the upcoming penn-led workshops for the city budget. and much earlier I was asking if, with obama's inauguration, we had entered upon a new chapter of understanding about our roles as citizens. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN 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] Penn-gemony receives its next Mayor
Anthony West wrote: Joe, I kind of agree with 'most everything you said, I think. N.B.: Although you addressed this to All, it actually only got sent to me. So go back and hit Reply All, if you want to send it to the list. Cheers, -- Tony All, This relationship precedes Nutter's administration and will probably succeed it as well. Penn's School of Education has produced at least one -- Connie Clayton -- head of the school board. I know that the city's Human Resource database, SOS, was built by Penn. The BRT database was also a co project with the University's social work, urban planning, etc.. There are probably dozens of other links to the city--why wouldn't there be. To have that much expertise a half mile west, you'd have to be out of your mind not to use it. However, I'd like to see the city be less beholdin' to one institution that already has enough money to consider putting tanning booths in each dorm room in order to achieve a more diverse student body. I'd like to see them mix it up a bit. Get some of the other schools involved. Don't just go to Penn each time you need an expert on ethics, genetics, faith-based initiatives (this is laughable), on and on. Penn wants to guard its place at the funding trough (Penn is often the distributor-of-choice for funds to the area, the local agent, for which it gets a hefty administrative fee). Penn positions itself to benefit Penn and there's no better way than to be up to your nose in political access. The community is also Penn's petri dish for social programs and other government initiatives to help out the community. No doubt, Penn does good for some, but it is always on Penn's terms, as it positions itself to be in the front of the line when the ole funding spigot gets turned and that vital replenishing liquidity comes gushing forth and streaming down over them like lucre's holy sacrament (secular alleluia's are appropriate here). In the meantime the community beneficiaries get to be close by when all that comes rushing through, where even the spray is enough to revive a program for the next funding year. Amen Joe (child, I said RISE and DANCE!!) C. (we're in the money, we're in the money!) Anthony West wrote: A brief introduction to the importance of University of Pennsylvania talent in Mayor Nutter's administration, Penn Alumni Run City Hall, appears in the Feb. 5 Philadelphia Public Record. It may be found at this link: http://issuu.com/phillyrecord/docs/pr-471-p -- Tony West You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. -- Truth has a liberal bias. Bill Moyer 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.
