[UC] Phila City Planning Commission

[Glenn]

Neighbors,

The PCPC tabled a decision on the Campus Apts. Inn. yesterday. Twenty of our 
neighbors testified in opposition to the proposal. The information and 
testimony excellently covered the wide range of problems with the proposal and 
the development team.

As occurred at the Phila historical commission, the ZBA staff had mysteriously 
reversed the earlier rejection of the Penn proposal! (Feb 13, we learned that 
Campus Apts/Penn had secretly applied for some pre approval to smash zoning 
rules and had been rejected)

Clearly, the invisible hand continues to work behind the scenes, and citizens 
must not believe that this bold Penn/Campus Apts attempt to smash zoning 
standards has been resolved. For those of you not in attendance, in my opinion, 
our neighbors testified brilliantly and the Campus Apts/Penn team looked 
incredibly pathetic and disingenuous.



FYI: It was revealed that the secret vote of the UCHS board rejected the 
proposal to smash zoning rules. The UCHS members might be terribly confused 
because their last newsletter failed to make any disclosure of the Campus Apts 
hotel proposal. (The lead article covers the award given to Campus Apts and 
there was a major pitch for Penn/UCD's Party for the Park.   Party for the Park 
is the annual corporate celebration of the transfer of the previously public 
Clark Park to the University of Pennsylvania corporations.)

The March UCHS newsletter (editor Mike Hardy) also failed to announce, in 
advance, the secret vote of the board about approval of the project. And many 
people seemed confused recently that the UCHS President, Ms. Stewart, refused 
to provide the results of the secret vote. 

One of our neighbors revealed yesterday during testimony that the UCHS board 
had in fact voted against the project. It appears the members of UCHS have some 
serious need of new responsible leadership like the SHCA needs!!!



Also fyi, the Penn/UCD team submitted some 300 petition signatures supporting 
the hotel. On this public list, we have previously discussed how UCD has 
approximately 300 cheerleaders to sign petitions and surveys for any Penn 
backed attack. I saw Mr. Wendell Lewis at yesterdays hearing. I have not seen 
the UCD official letter of support for the Campus Apts project.

Question: We have had no reports about the UCD corporate event, Party for the 
Park. Can anyone reveal whether this event was used to gather signatures for 
the hotel?? And have any leaders of the SHCA, FOCP and UCHS been identified 
assisting to gather signatures from "the 300?" The answers are not for 
submission to the PCPC. I'm simply very curious about this secret supporting 
petition and "community leaders" involved.

Good work neighbors and keep fighting,

Glenn

Re: [UC] For Phila Public Education Junkies

[anm]

Just so we get the full picture of what BAEO is all about:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Black_Alliance_for_Educational_Options

http://www.blackcommentator.com/16_thw.html

Andrew

Quoting Craigsolve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Passing this on to those of you who last month were so moved by our
> Philadelphia public schools and their impact on the livability/desirability
> of neighborhoods and communities.
>
> The SRC is trying to come to grips with failing public schools vs new charter
> school applicants. The pdf  has links to three interesting Phila Media
> Holdings LLC articles.
>
> Compared to under-performing neighborhoods, UC is blessed to enjoy UPenn's
> educational influence and money.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Craig
>
> [BAEO] Call to Action
> Dear BAEO Parents and Members,
>
> There will be no new charter schools in Philadelphia if the School Reform
> Commission heeds the advice of the Office of Charter Schools.
>
> As you know, the SRC is meeting tomorrow to decide whether or not to side
> with the Charter School Office and not approve any of the 15 applications for
> charter schools. Instead they are proposing the conversion of existing \"low
> performing\" schools into charters. The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday,
> May 21, 2008 at 1:00 p.m. at 440 N. Broad St.
>
> The applications include a proposal for the nation\'s first high school
> exclusively for foster-care youth, a performing-arts high school and charters
> that focus on science, college prep, finance, career training and character
> development.
>
> Parents deserve the opportunity to choose the school that best fits the needs
> of their child. Those choices are in jeopardy of being limited, and we need
> your support to remain optimistic about the future of \"schools of choice\"
> in Philadelphia. Our children need these schools.
>
> We ask you to inform friends, parents, community leaders and individuals that
> support our desire to continue to approve charter schools in Philadelphia. It
> is imperative that we do not allow the SRC and the Philadelphia School
> District to disenfranchise students. Please urge them to email and/or fax
> members of the SRC to voice their opposition, and feel free to post or email
> the attached flyer.
>
> http://www.baeo.org/files/SRC_ALERT.pdf
>
> Thanks so much,
>
> Philadelphia Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO)
>
> Ruth C. Knox
> Philadelphia BAEO
> 1207 Chestnut Street - 2nd Floor
> Philadelphia, PA 19107
> Tel: 215-851-1795/Fax: 215-564-9376
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> © 2007 Black Alliance for Educational Options
> 1710 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Floor 12, Washington, D.C. 20036 | phone: (202)
> 429-2236 | fax: (202) 429-2237
>



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Phila City Planning Commission

[KAREN ALLEN]

Yes, it was stated publicly at the Planning Commission hearing yesterday by a 
UC Historical Society board member that UCHS has voted to stand in opposition 
to the Campus Inn project.  UCHS President Belynda Stewart refused the 
opportunity to state to the UC Review reporter "The Board of UCHS has voted to 
oppose the Campus Inn project". Why?  Consider this:
 
In the October, 2007 UC Review report on the Phila Historical Commission 
Archetectural Committee hearing, it was noted that I identified myself as a 
member of UCHS, and that I was opposed to the project. Ms. Stewart wrote an 
opinion letter in response wherein she tried to marginalize my opinion, while 
inflating the opinion of a supporter of the project. 
 
According to Ms. Stewart's letter,  I was merely one member out of 500, that I 
didn't speak on behalf of UCHS, and tried to imply that my opinion was 
irrelevant and meant nothing. Ms. Stewart then went on to say that the Review 
did not quote a supporter of the project, a former UCHS Board member, and a 
highly  successful Realtor. This carried the clear implication that this 
supporter's opinion should carry more weight than mine (after all, I'm just 
some dumb lawyer and, incidentally, a  former UCHS Board member myself).
 
I think this illustrates that Ms. Stewart is personally in favor of the Campus 
Inn project, which is her right. But as President of an organization, she does 
not have the right to put her personal opinion ahead of the official stance of 
the organization she presides over. I think that had the UCHS vote been in 
favor of the project, she would have had no problem releasing the results 
publicly. 
 
 
 
 
 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [UC] Phila City Planning 
CommissionDate: Wed, 21 May 2008 09:36:58 -0400





Neighbors,
The PCPC tabled a decision on the Campus Apts. Inn. yesterday. Twenty of our 
neighbors testified in opposition to the proposal. The information and 
testimony excellently covered the wide range of problems with the proposal and 
the development team.
As occurred at the Phila historical commission, the ZBA staff had mysteriously 
reversed the earlier rejection of the Penn proposal! (Feb 13, we learned that 
Campus Apts/Penn had secretly applied for some pre approval to smash zoning 
rules and had been rejected)
Clearly, the invisible hand continues to work behind the scenes, and citizens 
must not believe that this bold Penn/Campus Apts attempt to smash zoning 
standards has been resolved. For those of you not in attendance, in my opinion, 
our neighbors testified brilliantly and the Campus Apts/Penn team looked 
incredibly pathetic and disingenuous.
 
FYI: It was revealed that the secret vote of the UCHS board rejected the 
proposal to smash zoning rules. The UCHS members might be terribly confused 
because their last newsletter failed to make any disclosure of the Campus Apts 
hotel proposal. (The lead article covers the award given to Campus Apts and 
there was a major pitch for Penn/UCD’s Party for the Park.   Party for the Park 
is the annual corporate celebration of the transfer of the previously public 
Clark Park to the University of Pennsylvania corporations.)
The March UCHS newsletter (editor Mike Hardy) also failed to announce, in 
advance, the secret vote of the board about approval of the project. And many 
people seemed confused recently that the UCHS President, Ms. Stewart, refused 
to provide the results of the secret vote. 
One of our neighbors revealed yesterday during testimony that the UCHS board 
had in fact voted against the project. It appears the members of UCHS have some 
serious need of new responsible leadership like the SHCA needs!!!
 
Also fyi, the Penn/UCD team submitted some 300 petition signatures supporting 
the hotel. On this public list, we have previously discussed how UCD has 
approximately 300 cheerleaders to sign petitions and surveys for any Penn 
backed attack. I saw Mr. Wendell Lewis at yesterdays hearing. I have not seen 
the UCD official letter of support for the Campus Apts project.
Question: We have had no reports about the UCD corporate event, Party for the 
Park. Can anyone reveal whether this event was used to gather signatures for 
the hotel?? And have any leaders of the SHCA, FOCP and UCHS been identified 
assisting to gather signatures from "the 300?" The answers are not for 
submission to the PCPC. I’m simply very curious about this secret supporting 
petition and "community leaders" involved.
Good work neighbors and keep fighting,
Glenn
 
 
 

Re: [UC] For Phila Public Education Junkies

[Craigsolve]

The point of the original post was to let people know there are possible major 
changes to our Philadelphia charter school process; that is all.

Personally, I believe there is room in Philadelphia for charter schools. I am 
not affiliated with any charter schools.

My first intro to BAEO was through the now former office manager for a powerful 
local State Senator, who has been supportive of charter schools in his 
district. I think of it as constituent services. Thus I'm on BAEO's mailing 
list, and I appreciate the heads-up on the SRC issue that nobody else I am 
aware of seems to have publicized.

I am unfamiliar with your references; one of which asserts:

 According to the Department of Education's Office of Inspector General report 
on Department PR expenditures in fiscal years 2002 through 2004, BAEO received 
$1,500,000 in 2002 - 2004, to "actively support parental choice and increase 
educational options for black children through a 'multi-layered media 
campaign'." [2] 

I don't have a problem with advocating for issues, a position shared currently 
by the DNC & RNC where $1.5 mm for a multi-year national campaign is chump 
change.

Further, BAEO's board has several interesting and/or local people:

Cory Booker - mayor of Newark NJ and in my opinion a lot smarter and more 
exciting than Obama
Dawn Chavous - from a local family of PR/political operatives. I found her to 
be committed to helping the WPhila community
Dwight Evans - I think you will be hard pressed for making the case that as a 
State Rep he has done anything but to build up and to support public and 
private education in Philly.

Again I was just sharing info, since education and how it is driven has been a 
recent issue on this list.

Ciao,

Craig



In a message dated 05/21/08 12:23:13 Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:
Just so we get the full picture of what BAEO is all about: 

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Black_Alliance_for_Educational_Options
 

http://www.blackcommentator.com/16_thw.html 

Re: [UC] Phila City Planning Commission

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

KAREN ALLEN wrote [4/17/08]:

The "Stamper Square" hotel controversy sounds so much
like our Campus Inn issue, it's uncanny, all the way down
to having the head of the local special services district
in support of the project (for those of you who did not
know, the Historical Commission file on the Campus Inn
includes a letter of support from Lewis Wendell on behalf
of UCD). 




Glenn wrote:
Also fyi, the Penn/UCD team submitted some 300 petition signatures 
supporting the hotel. On this public list, we have previously discussed 
how UCD has approximately 300 cheerleaders to sign petitions and surveys 
for any Penn backed attack. I saw Mr. Wendell Lewis at yesterdays 
hearing. I have not seen the UCD official letter of support for the 
Campus Apts project.





I believe it is wrong for ucd (or ccd) to take sides when 
there is a public dispute to be arbitrated by the city. I 
believe ucd should remain neutral. ucd is funded in order to 
serve all the citizens within the university city district 
equally, and when there are public questions among competing 
stakeholders there, ucd should not publicly support either 
side, or behave as one of the competing stakeholders (esp. 
when david adelman of campus apartments is vice chair on 
ucd's board of directors.)


one of shca's board members with ties to campus apartments 
recused himself at shca's 13 feb. meeting over the zoning 
question. that was the right thing to do.


..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.