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>.
