So this would be an organization that has the power to impose taxes?

I believe that's what it's called when all property owners are required
to pay towards something . . .

Kathleen 





-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kyle Cassidy
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 3:13 PM
To: Anthony West; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [UC] Funding special services

I think the only practical way to do it is divide the group's budget up
among all the property owners in the area and have them (us) pay for it.
It eliminates two of the problems that some people had with ucd which
are:

1) uneven funding -- everybody would pay the same thing
2) representation -- the organization would be (as is UCD now) beholden
to it's funders which in this case would be the people in the district.
Everybody would get to vote on what services should be provided (you pay
the tax, you get a vote).

You'd just have to convince people that playing football without Penn's
money is better because they have more control. 




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 2:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [UC] Funding special services (Was: which bad thing?)

Hi, Guy. I find all this negativism annoying too, especially when it is
accompanied by a complete lack of practical thinking.
 
I think your idea is great, and thinking about it with some good
business heads could be very beneficial for University City
 
Remember, though, about the proposed NID: it was intended to extend
UCD's current services (let's call them "John Fenton" as a kind of
discussion shorthand). The original "John Fenton" was to continue being
funded by UCD's current major backers -- Penn, Drexel, large real estate
firms.
 
If we are talking about a service entity that does roughly what UCD
does, it's going to cost something like what UCD now costs. That cost is
currently derived from millions of dollars from major donors. So let us
be terribly clear:
 
Do you envision a CID that would seek to retain these millions of
dollars? Or do you seek one that will deliberately avoid them? If the
latter, who else will we hit up around here to replace those lost funds,
and how?
 
A special services district is a kind of business. It needs a business
plan. We need to begin with a business plan, rather than with all this
community-input chat. Because if you begin with the community-input
chat, what we're likely to wind up with is a whole lot of community
input into nothing.
 
-- Tony West

        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
        To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [email protected] 
        Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 11:32 AM
        Subject: Re: [UC] which bad thing?

        
        Thanks for getting back.  My name is Guy Laren.
         
        I have been disappointed by all of the negative energy on the
Listserv lately by both groups of people who have one seemingly unifying
goal and passion-- a love of UC.
         
        I thought that my proposal to create this NID (or my proposed
"CID") by funding it the same way that Penn had proposed (the model
already exists in someone's archives).  If I remember exactly the amount
that would be raised was less than $1,5 million per year.  I believe
that we could get commitments for that amount by going to the very
people who would have been taxed by the NID and then get people who are
currently contributing to the UCD and get close to that figure in a very
short time (might have to borrow some of it on peoples' promise to pay).
         
        Then we would have our CID/NID/BID, but it would be run by the
community.  I see this type of entity as a community based one from the
start.  I like to use the anaylogy of colonial times, because it is
where many of our models for this community/village stuff started.  If
there were a threat in a colonial village the leaders would find a way
to get the Villagers to commit to enhanced patrols.  I'm sure they would
do the same for health issues.  In UC's case we have the City providing
for heath and security, but it is inadequate.  Shouldn't the community
run their own supplemental services?
         
        It sounds daunting, but one of the special aspects of our
community is the surplus of intelligent and committed residents.
         
        Guy Laren



        
________________________________

        See what's free at AOL.com
<http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . 


----
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>.

Reply via email to