Tony,
I am speaking of those who have been a part of all UC community Associations
for at least the past 15 years who have had a hand in the directing the tone
of the neighborhood who are at the forefront of latest skirmish with
citizens about the Campus Inn.
As Ray stated earlier they have also traditionally formed sub-community
groups whenever things haven't gone quite their way, such as the various and
sundry "Friends" groups.
To this you might insert many names and more I cannot think of right now.
To wit, The Friends of The:
a) Firehouse Market
b) Woodlands
c) Calvary Church
d) UCD
e) Clark Park
f) 40th St.
The common thread is these groups form when there is direct opposition by
community members to a project which they favor, or the way those in charge
would like things done.
It would be foolhardy to place the focus on current officers in February
2009, when they have essentially inherited a legacy of hard feelings from
the various community group versus the community skirmishes.
As I see it many of those who formerly these spin-off ³Friends² groups, find
themselves quite without friends (from the traditional sources to whom they
have lent support) as this project steam rollers their way.
I have been in the inner circle as you say, of several UC community
organizations and am intimately acquainted as to how they function. During
several of the above Friends engagements, I was record keeper.
There is no need for a study here. The modus operandii has not changed,
except for perhaps a few new faces. The greatest changes is at whom this
M.O. it is directed unfortunately.
-W
On 2/9/09 8:46 PM, "Anthony West" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Wilma,
>
> You are right, SHCA and UCHS have big internal political work to do
> right now after the tough public decision that split their memberships.
> Been there, done that. Let them go about that business then, if you're a
> member.
>
> If you're not a current member, now is a sweet time to join such a
> group! New volunteers and returning dropouts are welcomed eagerly into
> the Association's inner circle, because half the previous leaders were
> just taken out by a mortar hit. Newbies can have a major impact in
> moments like these.
>
> You may be right, for all I know, about the "leaders of community
> associations" backing the Campus Inn. So why don't we find out? How many
> officers, as of February 2009, have self-serving Penn connections? Let's
> take a poll.
>
> First, you decide on a list of community organizations you're going to
> include in your study. Then you decide on a range of job titles you're
> going to include. Then you decide on which Penn interactions will count
> as "self-serving" and which won't. Then you start measuring.
>
> I'd suggest you distinguish "officers" from "directors" and count only
> officers. That's not because directors can't be backstage Richelieus
> manipulating the front guys; it's strictly a matter of work time. A
> typical Association may have 5 officers and 20 directors. So if you want
> a good sample of Associations in this neighborhood, it'll cost you too
> much to track down and call all their directors.
>
> If you want to organize this task, Wilma, I'll volunteer to do 20% of
> the phonework.
>
> -- Tony West
>
>
>> I won't begin to speak for Karen, but MY take on what she wrote is that
>> quite a few (not all), of the alleged Campus Inn supporters have been
>> positing themselves as leaders of community associations and institutions,
>> to which many of us belong or have belonged.
>>
>> All the while they have been using their credibility as community activists
>> and representatives for self-serving purposes with, as you put it, the
>> economic engine of Penn, while spinning another agenda to the community they
>> purported to represent to keep others working and engaged.
>>
>> The most egregious is my opinion is the organizations who claim to want to
>> preserve the historical integrity of the neighborhood, while their friends
>> neighbors and members vehemently oppose this project.
>>
>> It also must be hurtful that so many of the neighbors immediately around
>> this project have put many hours, years and dollars working in these
>> community groups who ultimately failed to advocate their interest.
>>
>> Granted, there will proponents and opponents on any issue that concerns the
>> community.
>>
>> Disqualifying people from supporting it doesn't quite ring true for me.
>> Rather, a sense of betrayal is felt by those who believed these community
>> leaders actually stood for what they said they did.
>>
>> -Wilma
>
>
> ----
> 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>.
