Glenn moyer wrote:
These "regular meetings" never have agenda items publicly
announced in advance. These are not the "public forums" you
are pretending. Scheduled at 8 AM, it is ridiculous to
contend that it is the duty of community members to
dutifully attend all of these meetings for the anointed to
catch Lussenhop.
The one time he was caught and the geriatric social was
announced a day or two in advance in the UC review,
Lussenhop didin't show!!! He showed up next time at 8 AM.
Why must community members attend all monthly 8AM, tightly
controlled dog and pony shows, or lose their chance at
voicing their views or asking questions? It's absurd when
Lussenhop could announce any real public forum which he
wants to assert.
'first thursday' meetings were evaluated back in 2004
http://www.upenn.edu/almanac/v50/n23/comm_relations.html
This report represents the findings of the Committee on
Community Relations for the Fall semester 2003....
Does the community need a watchdog for University real
estate activities?
To explore the feasibility of a watchdog role for our
committee, we first sought input from the community on this
issue. We met with Ms. Melani Lamond, the secretary (an
elected office) of the University City Community Council
(UCCC). This group is an umbrella organization of University
City neighborhood organizations and special interest groups,
including Cedar Park Neighbors, Garden Court Community
Association, Walnut Hill Community Association, Powelton
Village Civic Association, Saunders Park Neighbors, Squirrel
Hill Community Association, and a few other groups. The UCCC
is comprised of the presidents of the individual
organizations in order to provide one strong group that
could give advice, share expertise, and build consensus. Ms.
Lamond is also an Associate Broker at Urban & Bye Realtor, a
University City real estate office. Ms. Lamond shared with
us some issues that had been contentious between the
community and the University but felt that, in general, the
community, or at least those members who are active in
community associations, was happy with recent University
initiatives....
What impact does the University's real estate policies have
on the UC communities and how well does it seek and use
input from its members?
The general feeling of the Committee was that although the
Office of Community and City Relations does very well in its
outreach work to the public, the office could be more
effective with greater resources. The timing of the first
Thursday monthly meeting at 8 a.m. prohibits many people
from attending, particularly residents who have school-age
children to attend to. The committee recommends that more
resources should be provided to this office so that it can
hold more than one meeting a month, advertise it more widely
and develop alternative strategies to inform the public. In
addition there is an impression that while the University
does seek community opinion on new initiatives, in fact in
most cases the key decisions have already been made and the
University is unlikely to reverse them. Some examples that
the Committee heard of were the Alexander school and the
40th Street project. In both cases, although public opinion
on these projects was solicited it was well after their
initiation. Finally the improvement of the real estate
market, particularly, within the Alexander school catchment
area, has made home ownership for the less wealthy members
of our community impossible, particularly for first time
owners. Despite this, there are more positive feelings
associated with the University involvement in the community
than negative expressed by community organizations.
- - - - -
just to clarify: the penn praxis friends of 40th street
meetings aren't the same as these first thursday meetings.
(though the minutes for both are equally hard to find)
..................
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>.
