>Summary: _public money_ is used to repair and maintain a _public park_. > >And this is_eee-vill!_ >
No Brian. This is what is often referred to as "pork money" when we're talking about government, directly earmarking the people's money for projects with dubious priorities and budgets. But, by putting up new walls of secrecy between tax payers, local residents; and how their money is spent by unaccountable special interests; there is an additional problem. We, the people, are allowing our government to turn over more money and power to special interests like Penn aka UCD. Branding tax money as "grants" and deceiving people with powerful propaganda is causing people to believe that "public-private partnerships" bring efficiency and extra resources. But neither is true! It's a way to deny taxpayers all rights to know (privatize the process); and becomes a massive barrier for people of this community, who would like to speak against investing in a fountain, etc. in Clark Park. Massive power is transferred to special interests; people are denied their rights to know and participate in their own public business; and money is fed into wasteful pork. Those are the problems and I did not invoke "eee-villl" Brian, it's called plutocracy, corporatocracy, or fascism. My God, people are under incredible stress as the city and state passes the costs of this CORPORATE PROCESS onto the working class people around the city. But the loss of our rights as citizens and residents is a much greater problem than the wasteful spending priorities! Most Americans know that they have lost their rights and democracy, but they need to openly consider what the hell is going on! The Clark Park Partnership is a continuation of the hand picked master plan steering committee. When people compare this 2007-2010 redesign process to the process we experienced when Clark Park was a public park, they will understand what they have lost for future generations! The design firm hired for the first redesign attempt conducted a public process, and the people of this community were involved in a public process. The company conducted the process the right way, and our neighbors spoke out! The current redesign shows that the public is being defied! The profound redesign of the park coupled with an unacceptable process shows the contempt for the people of this neighborhood, as well as their loss of rights. (Your process of having Tony at the FOCP table and a secret exclusive planning committee won't stand up to scrutiny as a legitimate public process.) But FOCP is going to find that it will be less and less relevant as the Penn hacks replace the government. You guys have a hard lesson coming, but FOCP let down the community and our rights as citizens in the process. They waited 7 years and took the process underground with the FOCP planning committee, and are doing the massive redesign that has been unpopular for years! Mr. Moyer PS: The use of ad hominem will no longer work well on the public list. People know that you are using the ad hominem technique instead of exposing any lie and showing evidence. They know that if I spoke a single lie, you guys would be all over it. Brian, you need to bring on my lies, apologize, or you'll look bad! -----Original Message----- >From: Brian Siano <[email protected]> >Sent: Mar 11, 2010 9:58 AM >To: >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [UC] Truth about grants/public private partnerships > >Summary: _public money_ is used to repair and maintain a _public park_. > >And this is_eee-vill!_ > >On 3/11/10, Glenn moyer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Many people are deceived when they hear about these public-private >> partnerships. All the grant money that will be used to redesign Clark Park >> is taxpayer money! Let me repeat, it is tax payer money! >> These public private partnerships siphon taxpayer money! There is no >> increased efficiency or free money. In fact, any real services are much >> more expensive to taxpayers, because the public money siphoned off takes an >> unfair share of public resources. In reality, these "grants" steal from >> taxpayers, and deny important projects and maintenance that could be spent >> transparently and appropriately around the city! >> Another example: Most of our neighbors don't realize that the trash that UCD >> touts as its charity is all disposed of at taxpayer expense. The student >> ghetto has the little un-recycled beer cups removed, but taxpayers pay for >> the disposal. (Not disclosing those facts, shows how the report card >> manipulates people into believing that UCD is charity!) >---- >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>.
