Bender, It was done by the general membership via motion in 2003. Prior to that time, the FOCP did not even regularly announce its Board meetings to its own members in clear violation of its laws. That was the case in 2001 when the unpopular redesign was first pushed.
Fortunately, the membership is made up of reasonable people. They generally join FOCP because of fear, and the members want the leaders to be responsible. The membership knows that FOCP does things that may be important to the whole community and they spoke up. Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights... Now Bender, back to your eagles and I'll go back to that local rag for ranters. A ranting dude ----- Original Message ----- From: Ross Bender To: Glenn Cc: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [UC] Missing UC Review announcement Dude, have you been smoking the black fungus of Persia again? I just reread the FOCP bylaws, from the website, dated October 2006. There is absolutely NO mention of the "UC Review" in those bylaws. NONE. Unless the Imperial Space Queen Vondra zapped it out of my computer, the bylaws contain NO (zip-zilch-zot) reference to this "UC Review" you're going on about at length. And if you think about it, why should ANYBODY be required to post ANYTHING in that throwaway advertising rag for illiterates, ranters, fanatics and Real Estate Princesses? I saw a copy of UC Review right next to STAR in the laundromat this afternoon and was careful not to let the Review's cheap ink smudge my wet clothes. Even STAR is preferable reading material for a dull afternoon. At least they had good pictures of Kate Moss' nose job and before and after pix of Britney's liposuction. Back to the pre-pregame show. GO EAGLES. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/mutate2.html On 1/13/07, Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Neighbors, I'm sorry to have to report another example of the problems with the FOCP leadership. The FOCP leaders were directed by their general membership in 2003 to announce the time, date, location and agenda of all board and members meetings of the FOCP in our local newspaper, The University City Review. The general membership understood that potential FOCP issues might be relevant to the large diverse community outside of the FOCP membership. Unfortunately, the wishes of the membership are too often irrelevant to the FOCP leaders. The FOCP did not announce their Jan 17 meeting last week, as the "10 day" standard requires, or in the current issue of the Review, Jan 10. This refusal to follow the directions of the members follows the similar missing announcement prior to the much discussed Nov 15 "public presentation." In the face of the discussions on this list and in the letters to the editor of the UC Review, you may find it amazing that FOCP leaders would again refuse its members wishes while showing contempt for our large diverse community. I announced the meeting as the lead for a letter to the editor anticipating the missing announcement. When you speculate about the purpose of a "Friends…" group, one thing should seem obvious. The most important purpose of the association for a public park would be to convey information to the local community. From the FOCP web site: The purpose of this corporation shall be to encourage, promote, and coordinate efforts of neighbors, area institutions and the city of Philadelphia in maintaining, improving and utilizing Philadelphia's Clark Park… (Interesting note: the new by-laws fail to mention park users) Now the FOCP by-laws also include the following: A "meeting" is any gathering at which a quorum exists provided that written notice of time and place be sent to all members and posted on Clark Park bulletin boards at least 10 days in advance of the meeting The general membership asked that the meeting announcement requirements be extended to the community and approved the additional direction for a UC Review announcement for very good reasons. It is clear that the purpose suggests that actual community engagement should always be a priority. In recent years, the FOCP takes actions like a micro-government and claims that it can legitimately represent the "community" rather than just its members. FOCP should never make this claim. But certainly announcing its agenda to the community is warranted and so properly requested by the members. After all the discussions about properly announcing meetings and the astroturfing about "17 public presentations," FOCP twice in a row fails to place a simple announcement in the local newspaper at a time most important to the community. By doing so the leaders are thumbing their nose at the wishes of its general membership as well as an understood duty to the whole community. Last time this was blamed on the editor: what will be the excuse this time? Many list members seem to hate my persistence when exposing a pattern in the abuse of power. However, the FOCP is pushing for authority to implement a redesign of a public park. Yet there is a refusal to accept any accountability to the community. When you further see a refusal to honor the wishes of its own general membership, I think its time to say "no more." Last week the FOCP concentrated on publishing a front page, self -congratulatory story about a several months old kiosk rather than a simple announcement about this redesign issue important to the whole community? Publishing the kiosk story while refusing to make a simple announcement seems almost absurd! I am sorry to have bothered you but I honestly believe it is my responsibility to point out this contempt. Thank you for your attention. Glenn Moyer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/624 - Release Date: 1/12/2007
