Re: [UC] Re: [UC-Announce] Clark Park Dog Run Update

[BGAndersen]

I agree with Brian, everyone should be members of the FOCP.


In a message dated 1/25/05 6:45:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

L a s e r B e a m � wrote:

> hi, I think the process between community members and their elected
> representatives is a real important process, too.
>
> and it seems to me that if you were really REALLY interested in
> process, and in community members, you would becirculating two
> petitions, one for a dog run, and one against.

What bothered me about the petition was that it put the onus on the FOCP
to build a dog park-- no real debate, no consideration of the cost, or
anything. It was "FOCP, build the dog park." That's not a process.

Let's address Ray's comments about "process." I'm wondering why he sees
membership in the FOCP to be such an impediment to community discussion.
One could use his own logic above, and say that if one was "really
interested" in the park, then one would be joining the FOCP. After all,
the FOCP does a lot in the park.

But I just can't take Ray's complaints about paying to participate very
seriously. According to the FOCP website, a year's membership costs _ten
dollars_. There's some discussion about raising that, which makes sense,
but _ten dollars_? That's not exactly a Harvard tuition. And it gets you
the newsletter. it gets you a chance to get onto a committee, it gets
you a chance to run for the board.