[UC] SHCA Meeting: Proposed Development at 46th and Spruce Street
The current owner of the property at the SE corner of 46th and Spruce Streets will present his plans to build an apartment building on that site at a meeting of the zoning committee of the Spruce Hill Civic Association tonight at 7:00 at the SHCA building at 257 S. 45th St. This is the legally-required RCO meeting, where neighbors have the opportunity to examine the proposal, offer criticisms and suggestions for improvement, and to declare whether they support or oppose it. Here's a link to some elevation drawings of the building, as well as a review of the zoning variances being sought: https://www.facebook.com/groups/823548771046986/?ref=bookmarks Mary
[UC] Re: [PFSNI] fwd:Re: Possible scam/fraud in neighborhood - Lew Blum Towing - Beware!
As I entered my house near 45th and Pine, a few days before Thanksgiving, I was approached by an elderly gentleman, very upset, who was looking for his car. He asked if I had seen anyone towing on the block. Since I had been out, I couldn't say. He assured me that he had not parked in an illegal spot, that he had no outstanding tickets and that he had only left the car about an hour. I suggested that it seemed like his only recourse was to call the police to see whether it was towed or to put in a stolen car report. It was indeed mysterious and I felt very sorry for him. I suspect now that he too was a victim of this outrageous scam. I'm not surprised to hear about the tow truck driver hanging around 46th and Walnut. Last year I was broadsided by a taxi that failed to yield at 46th and Sansom. I was immediately surrounded by a gang of burly men who wanted to help me by towing my car, telling me that it was not worth waiting for the police to come and file a report. They were intimidating, made it more difficult for me to do what I needed to do, and made an unpleasant experience even worse. They scurried when the police arrived. I wonder what can be done to get this behavior under control. Mary -Original Message- From: Linda Lee lml3...@gmail.com To: UC Neighbors current ver u...@ucneighbors.org Cc: purple univcity@list.purple.com; pfsni pf...@ccat.sas.upenn.edu Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 7:37 am Subject: [PFSNI] fwd:Re: Possible scam/fraud in neighborhood - Lew Blum Towing - Beware! Awful! Definitely fight this! A friend of mine lives at 46th Walnut and says a tow truck guy hangs out at that intersection all day, just waiting for someone to park 'illegally,' then hauls their vehicle away. I suspect this happens all over the city... -L From: Veronika Lambert ahojv...@gmail.com Date: December 9, 2014 9:47:06 AM EST To: Clark Park Tot Lot clarkparktot...@googlegroups.com Subject: Possible scam/fraud in neighborhood - Lew Blum Towing - Beware! Dear neighbors, One of our renters who lives on 45th Pine recently moved here from Washington State for a research position at Penn and had a very unpleasant experience with Lew Blum Towing. She hasn't been able to change her license and plates to PA yet, so isn't eligible for a permit and parks where legally possible. I know it might seem long to read, but please take a moment. I never heard of this happening before, but wanted to share with everyone so you are aware; especially during the holidays with out-of-town guests. It may be that the towing company is only targeting non-PA plates, but it's not certain. Posts online suggest they are not the most upstanding/reputable company, which is sad considering their signs are posted all around the neighborhood. Perhaps we should keep an eye on them and reconsider giving them business. The following was written by Lisa and sent to the President of Spruce Hill. I also suggested she send it to UCD. If anyone has any other suggestions how to possibly get her money refunded and more importantly to stop something like this from happening again, please let us know. (Lisa is cc'd on this email). On Tuesday, my boyfriend parked my car on Osage, near 46th St, where it is legal to park without a permit. I do not drive the car to work, so it wasn't until Saturday that I realized the car was missing. I called the police to tell them it was stolen. They came to my house, and within a few minutes had gotten word that the car had been towed. They told me they couldn't tell me why it had been towed, just gave me the address of where to get it: Lew Blum Towing. When I went to get it, I paid nearly $300 ($175 for the tow, $100 for 4 days of storage, and $20 for a nondescript charge). In cash because they refused my credit card. When I received the 'paperwork' from them, it said my car had been towed from an address in Old City. I've never even been to Old City! When I told them there must be a mistake and asked for photos, they produced printed photographs of my car at a location I do not recognize. In the photo, there are HUGE signs saying it is a tow zone. Not wanting to argue because the place is really scary, I left with my car. There is no sign my car had been stolen and left at that location-- the car is completely fine-- no sign of break-in, dashboard, radio, ignition all fine, full tank of gas in the car, money still in the glove box for tolls, everything intact just as I had left it. What I am saying is they towed my car from a legal spot, took photos of it somewhere illegal, and required me to pay to get it back. I'm not a lawyer, but basically, that's at least stolen vehicle, fraud, and extortion. I called the police when I came home. A very sympathetic policeman took my story down and said he would personally make sure a detective got the information. He could not promise I would hear from the detective, I'm
[UC] Previous message - delete, don't open
Sorry all, but my account was apparently hacked and messages with links to advertisements were sent out to many on my contact list. Please just delete. My account is now secure and future messages are safe to open. Apologies for the inconvenience. Mary
[UC] Re: [UC-Announce] Mansion Demolition Final Hearing - 40th Pine
I am deeply disappointed in the leadership of the Spruce Hill Community Association and its failure to recognize and to advocate for the best interests of the residents of our neighborhood. The Levy Mansion and the demolished property at 43rd and Baltimore are the two latest and most significant examples of their apparent indifference to the fundamental principles outlined in the thorough plan for the future of Spruce Hill that was issued about a decade ago - the most important of which was the preservation of single family residences and the re-conversion, whenever possible, of multi-family dwellings back to single homes. Their acquiescence to Penn's demolition of the mansion at 40th and Pine and the construction of student dormitories (please don't insult our intelligence with references to developers and graduate student apartments) makes one wonder whether the organization has indeed progressed from the merely feckless to the unintentionally malign. I don't mean to underestimate the effort involved in running a community organization or how difficult it is to deal with a monster like Penn, as well as the small likelihood of neighbors ever prevailing in the insiders' game that is played out in the Historical Commission and Zoning Board. But caving in whenever Penn says boo seems to be a disservice to the community. The new zoning laws mean that the effectiveness of neighborhood groups is more critical than ever. Perhaps I am the only neighbor who feels this way, but I worry that our neighborhood is at risk if we don't have a more effective community association to represent us. Mary McGettigan -Original Message- From: Lauren Leatherbarrow op...@earthlink.net To: 'UC-Announce' univcity-annou...@lists.purple.com Sent: Wed, Dec 12, 2012 11:14 pm Subject: [UC-Announce] Mansion Demolition Final Hearing - 40th Pine The University of Pennsylvania and a developer have applied for and received a demolition permit for the Levy Mansion (circa 1853) at the corner of 40th and Pine. This national and locally historically designated property was designed by Samuel Sloan, the same architect that designed 1860’s Woodland Terrace (where I’ve lived since 1985) a few blocks away. It is about the same size and is the same Italianate style Victorian as our buildings. The Levy Mansion is currently partially surrounded by 1960’s additions (which we are OK with tearing down). Some near neighbors and the Woodland Terrace HomeOwners Association have opposed the demolition of the cultural resource and appealed the permit. Spruce Hill Community Association whose turf includes both the site and Woodland Terrace have not been opposed to demolition and have supported the proposed construction of 122 apartments on the site. Recently a group of Penn Students have made an alternative proposal to use and study the building. The final hearing on the demolition permit will be Monday December 17th beginning at 10 a.m. (try to arrive early) 1515 Arch Street, 18th Floor (bring photo ID to get into the building). It should be interesting and worth coming to (and we could use the support)… This has been going on since December of 2007 when an 11 story hotel was proposed for the site. – for more information please check out these sites: http://www.heritech.org/advocacy/40Pine.html 34th Street Magazine Article And this letter to the DP from Adam Levine. Yours, Lauren Leatherbarrow President WTHA
[UC] Electrician
Does anyone on the list have contact information for the very good neighborhood electrician, a young man named Ken? Thanks! Mary
Re: [UC] Electrician
Hi Margie: Thanks so much. I have been looking for months for Ken's number! Hope I can return the favor sometime. Mary -Original Message- From: Margie Politzer m.polit...@verizon.net To: University City listserv Llist univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Tue, Jul 24, 2012 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [UC] Electrician Hi Mary, Ken Thomforde 215-350-5064 Margie On Jul 24, 2012, at 5:09 PM, mcget...@aol.com wrote: Does anyone on the list have contact information for the very good neighborhood electrician, a young man named Ken? Thanks! Mary
Re: [UC] Electrician
Thanks for the info, Richard. Mary -Original Message- From: Richard Conrad rdcon...@verizon.net To: mcgettig mcget...@aol.com Cc: m.politzer m.polit...@verizon.net; UnivCity UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Tue, Jul 24, 2012 10:11 pm Subject: Re: [UC] Electrician Also, the electrician to whom Ken apprenticed, is Lee Garner 215-222-4375. On Jul 24, 2012, at 7:07 PM, mcget...@aol.com wrote: Hi Margie: Thanks so much. I have been looking for months for Ken's number! Hope I can return the favor sometime. Mary -Original Message- From: Margie Politzer m.polit...@verizon.net To: University City listserv Llist univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Tue, Jul 24, 2012 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [UC] Electrician Hi Mary, Ken Thomforde 215-350-5064 Margie On Jul 24, 2012, at 5:09 PM, mcget...@aol.com wrote: Does anyone on the list have contact information for the very good neighborhood electrician, a young man named Ken? Thanks! Mary
Re: [UC] Multi-house porch sale
Dear Martha: Vices for sale in the neighborhood! What a great opportunity! Unfortunately, while the possibility of acquiring some lust at a bargain price is very tempting, I' afraid that my tendency to gluttonous behavior has made me far too slothful to get up early on a Saturday morning to beat what I'm sure will be quite a crowd of shoppers. While I will envy those who do get there early, I promise not to get angry if someone has already made off with the wheelbarrow that I could certainly use in my garden. Good Luck with your sale! Mary -Original Message- From: Martha Ledger mledge...@verizon.net To: UnivCity listserv univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Thu, Jun 7, 2012 6:29 am Subject: [UC] Multi-house porch sale Hi all, The 500 block of South 46th Street is having a multi-house porch sale this Saturday, June 9th, from 9 a.m. 'til whenever. LADDERS, VICES, TWO COLLAPSABLE BIKES, BOXES OF NAILS, SCREWS, TACKS, A WHEELBARROW, 100' OF 3/8 ROPE( NEVER USED) A CAMP CHAIR WITH A FOOT REST, GARDEN TOOLS, ELECTRIC HEATER, COMPACT BOX OF WEIGHTS (30#) AND MUCH MORE. FABRIC, FUNKY CLOTHES, OLD LIGHT FIXTURES, SMALL FURNITURE, AND BOOKS BABY EQUIPMENT: STROLLER, HIGH CHAIR, BOOSTER SEAT, BABY TUB, FUNKY JEWELRY THAT MAY OR MAY NOT GO WITH THE FUNKY CLOTHES LISTED ABOVE (everyone's funky is different), SWIVEL DESK CHAIRS PLANTS LEMONADE STAND (stand not for sale, but drinks, yes) And more. Worth checking out! Martha Ledger
Re: [UC] Tell Philadelphia City Council to increase school funding
Hah! Rick, I went to the Nutter site and sent the emails as you suggested and they were all rejected - they seem to have been regarded as spam. Nice way for Council members to treat their mayor and his constituents! Mary -Original Message- From: Rick Conrad rdcon...@verizon.net To: UnivCity UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Thu, Jun 16, 2011 1:45 pm Subject: [UC] Tell Philadelphia City Council to increase school funding Hi, I just sent emails to all 17 Philadelphia City Council members urging them to save vital educational programs by voting to increase funding to the Philadelphia School District. Please join me in urging them to do the right thing for our kids by clicking the link below: http://action.nutter2011.com/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6372 Thanks.
[UC] Roundup in Clark Park - latest research
Frank Chase's reassurances that the pesticide Roundup is safe to humans and animals, are, I am sure, well-intentioned. But the very latest research, done by independent, university-based scientists, makes a strong argument that the dangers of this product have been grossly underestimated. Numerous studies have now demonstrated the toxicity of Roundup (not just its main ingredient glyphosate) to amphibians, mammals and humans. In Ontario, a dramatic increase in miscarriages and premature births occurred in farm families where the farmer fathers were using Roundup. In Argentina, a region newly-planted in RoundupReady soy and frequently sprayed with Roundup saw a significant increase in certain birth defects. Researchers in France and Argentina, alarmed at this association between Roundup use and harm to humans, undertook research aimed at testing whether there was a cause and effect relationship at work. They concluded that Roundup, at concentrations well below those commonly employed in agriculture, produced birth defects in amphibians, reduced fertility in rodents, and was lethal to human fetal, embryonic and placental cells. Other researchers have observed an association between exposure to Roundup and increases in lymphoma in humans. Apparently, the position that Roundup is harmless is based largely on research that 1) was performed by scientists in the employ of its manufacturer, much of it never published in any peer-reviewed journals, and with evidence that negative findings were suppressed and 2) investigated the toxicity of glyphosate alone, ignoring the fact that the additives in the Roundup compound greatly increase the toxic effect. Two just-published reports address the relationship between Roundup and birth defects and the safety of crops genetically modified to tolerate spraying with Roundup (the plants store Roundup, which thus enters the food supply either directly through human consumption, or indirectly, as animal feed that then is stored by the animals, eventually consumed by humans). They are both excellent reviews of the status of research on Roundup and a good source for the most important scientific literature on the topic. http://www.scribd.com/doc/57277946/RoundupandBirthDefectsv5 http://www.gmwatch.org/files/GMsoy_SustainableResponsible_Sept2010_Summary.pdf, Reading these reviews, as well as articles on the toxic effects of incredibly small doses of Roundup on human fetal and placental cells, certainly shakes one's faith in Monsanto's claims of its being harmless. In any case, neither Frank Chance nor the FOCP are the pesticide police. They are not responsible for its application in Clark Park, nor are they scientists equipped to judge its safety. Clearly, the responsibility lies with the city and its agents (UCD, landscape contractors, etc). How much Roundup was used in Clark Park is only part of the story. How much of this pesticide has been spread around the city at large? Perhaps that question should be posed to the Parks and Rec people. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that this is a potential public health concern. After all, the city of Boulder, CO has banned its use. Roundup and the crops genetically modified to tolerate it are now hugely controversial in Europe and it is likely that the debate about its safety will go on for some time - there is billions at stake. At this point, I don't think any one can say definitively whether the application of Roundup in Clark Park does or does not pose a risk to children, to pregnant women, or to couples hoping to become parents. For now, people will have to decide for themselves, I guess, how much uncertainty they can tolerate when it comes to their health and their children's. Mary
[UC] Fwd: Roundup in Clark Park - response from Frank Chance
Hi all: For some reason, I got an e-mail from Mr. Chance off-list, instead of from Tony West, who had made the initial offer to fill people in on the details of the application of Roundup in Clark Park. Members of the listserv can decide for themselves whether they are satisfied with Mr. Chance's account of Roundup's safety, and of when and in what quantities it is used in the park. I suspect that neither he nor Tony know the facts about its application and that to learn them, one would have to go to Parks and Rec, or UCD, or this newly-formed Clark Park oversight organization, or whoever the heck is responsible for the park at this point. I made no inquiries about Mr. Moyer, so I am really at a loss as to why referencing him represented half of Mr. Chance's reply. Mary -Original Message- From: Frank L. Chance chanc...@sas.upenn.edu To: mcgettig mcget...@aol.com Cc: Brian Siano briansi...@gmail.com; Glenn Moyer glen...@earthlink.net; Tony West anthony.abbott.w...@gmail.com; Ed Halligan edwardhalli...@aol.com Sent: Fri, Jun 10, 2011 11:45 am Subject: Roundup in Clark Park Dear Mary-- First off, let me apologize for not posting to the email list. I am not a member of that list, but if you wish to forward this to the list please feel free to do so. Roundup is a chemical herbicide which is not harmful to mammals, including humans. It is used by many gardeners and landscapers as a means of removing undesirable plant material. If used responsibly, it is not harmful to existing plants, and if used in appropriate quantities and concentrations it does not result in chemical runoff or environmental damage. Generally speaking, landscape maintenance crews in Clark Park do not use Roundup on a regular basis. During the recent revitalization, it was used in the closed-off section of the park, in limited quantities, to prepare the soil for new plantings of such beneficial plants as grass, shrubs, and flowers. The alternative would be very expensive--your city does not have the resources to pay workers to hand-weed the whole of Clark Park. There was no opportunity for (legal) contact between the general public and the herbicide, and it was a 2% concentration, the kind available over the counter of your local hardware store. (This is important because much of the web chatter about Roundup misuse is actually about the agribusiness use of concentrations as high as 40%.) Moreover, Mr. Moyer greatly exaggerates in his posts in many ways. He is wrong about the quantity of Roundup used on this occasion--it was not gallons pr barrels of the chemical, butt a reasonable and proper amount. Secondly, when organic fertilizers have been applied to Clark Park in the past he has claimed that they were Roundup or other herbicides--a claim which is simply false. So despite his claims there is no decades-long history of Roundup application to the park, and certainly no history of dumping of this or any other chemical in Clark Park. Third, Roundup is not even classed as a toxic chemical--it is a herbicide that is toxic only to broad-leaved plants, not to human beings or our mammalian pets. Fourth, the Friends of Clark Park have never applied any chemicals to the park--they have been applied by contractors hired by the owners of the Park (the City of Philadelphia) or by the University City District through their agreements with the City of Philadelphia. In general, Mr. Moyer has an eccentric view of the importance of the Friends of Clark Park in the maintenance of Clark Park. The park is owned and operated by the City of Philadelphia under the auspices of the Parks Recreation Commission. All construction projects in the park, even the planting of a single tree, need specific permission of Parks Rec. Any acquisition or de-acquisition of land for Clark Park (or any city park) requires legislation by City Council. All large events in the Park must get permits from Parks Rec, a process in which FoCP has some advisory input, through which we attempt to communicate the will of the community to the City officials. As you can imagine, however, the will of the community is rarely clear--some people want more concerts, some want fewer; some neighbors hate flea markets, some love flea markets; some of us enjoy wide expanses of well-groomed grass, others want to play in meadows of wildflowers or dance in the shade of trees. In the end, FoCP spends more time reporting issues to the city--a fallen limb, a dead tree, a broken swing in the playground--than it does advocating for or against any given event proposed for Clark Park. Mr. Moyer has chosen not to be a participant in FoCP, so of course he is not very well informed on the actual activities of the group. While I do not claim to be a horticulturalist, a biochemist, or even an expert in this field, I hope this information is useful to you. Please feel free to contact me
Re: [UC] News about Clark Park herbicide
Tony: According to your post, the herbicide Roundup was indeed applied to Clark Park A during its reconstruction. Reasonable people have concerns about its safety and since many of us cannot stop by the FOCP table this Saturday, could you please post to this listserve the details that you have at your disposal about this chemical and its use in the park? That seems a more efficient way to inform as many neighbors as possible about the presence of this potentially toxic compound. Thanks. Mary -Original Message- From: Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net To: UnivCity UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wed, Jun 8, 2011 10:50 pm Subject: Re: [UC] News about Clark Park herbicide People who want detailed information on Round-Up and its use in the Park A restoration project, which is days away from completion, can swing by the Friends of Clark Park membership table at the Farmers' Market this Saturday from 10 to 2, iff'n it don't rain. FoCP volunteers are in the park 20 Saturdays a year manning an information table. It's the most-accessible civic group in West Philly; no other body is easier to talk to, or to join. But we don't have an office, or paid staff; we're just neighbors like you. --Tony West On 6/8/2011 11:56 AM, Glenn wrote: Report on dangers of roundup and cover-up. see links below RoundUp is the herbicide used in Clark Park. Earlier this spring, I reported my last sighting and confirmation of the chemical being used in Clark Park. (I wonder if Penn would disclose how much it uses on its campus?) My eyewitness report: The worker was pumping large amounts on the tree roots in the fenced off section of the park. I asked the worker for the name of the chemical and he confirmed it was roundup. (I know that the truth only comes from the front line workers in a plutocracy.) They then covered it with thick mulch circles around the few remaining trees. Concerned individuals can spot the privatized land where this herbicide is destroying the natural soil. Dandelion, clover, and almost all other varieties of plants will have been conspicuously destroyed, and the single spindly (unhealthy looking) grass variety will be the only lawn present. (The suburbs are drenched in this roundup stuff, and that is why it arrived in Clark Park with the gentrification!) Long term residents will remember beautiful Clark Park before these chemicals were used! UCD and the FOCP has denied that anything other than organic fertilizer has ever been used in Clark Park. This is false! And the city doesn't care what the invitation only Clark Park Partnership does! (In the past, the Clark Park workers only put warnings at a few of the sidewalks, while they were spreading the chemical, because of these assurances about safety.) For many years, I've tried to warn pet owners, parents, and the people of West Philly about the use of this chemical in Clark Park by reporting on this public listserv. With the few minimal warning plaques on the day of the chemical, many West Philadelphians certainly didn't know they were exposing their families before the drying period was over. More importantly, I believe the information about the global environmental danger of these chemicals is just scratching the surface. I think this is a much more serious global problem than exposing the population of one upscaled, gentrified, shopping district! http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=vaaid=21251 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/07/roundup-birth-defects-herbicide-regulators_n_872862.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. 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.
[UC] UCD Worker shot at Walnut and Farragut Terrace
Around 1:00PM this afternoon, four shots were fired by a moving vehicle at a UCD streetcleaner. The man was shot in the left shoulder and initial indications are that he will survive the shooting. Walnut street between Farragut and 47th Streets has been closed by the Philadelphia police. They were joined at the scene by Penn Police and other employees of the UCD. Eyewitnesses told me that someone driving past shot at the worker who was in his streetcleaning vehicle at the time. He was taken away in an ambulance with blood coming from a wound in his shoulder. Another UCD employee confirmed to me that it was indeed one of their people who was shot. I did not ask the victim's name. I said that we would all be looking forward to an update on his condition and hoped that he would have a speedy recovery. Three cameras mounted on the large apartment building immediately across from the shooting may help the police identify the shooter's car.
Re: [UC] Dueling Listservs - thanks for the analysis!
Thank you, Karen, for your analysis of the frequent communications regarding the Campus Inn proposal that had appeared on this list - a response to those who would question the role and value of this listserv. It was my impression that the list had been instrumental in the hotel protest, but thanks to your efforts, it's clear that it's a fact that the list was indeed an important part of keeping neighbors informed and involved in that vital issue. I think it is significant that the recent article in the Inquirer about efforts to put a private prison and day-reporting center on Greys Avenue appeared weeks after it was reported on this list. One of the neighbors near the proposed site even commented on how they had only had a day's warning of a meeting on the proposal and that this was only communicated to the neighbors through some scattered posters and flyers. Even though computers may be unevenly distributed throughout the city's population, they are still a vital means of communication. Anyone who thinks a listserv can have no influence should consider the fate of the Campus Inn. This is not a claim, of course, that the listserv was as important as all the time, money and effort put into defeating the hotel project, but in a fight like that, every little bit helps. I don't think one can underestimate the magnitude of that victory, where a group of neighbors defeated a proposal backed, not only by a major university, but also by a realtor whose company had just been the recipient of a $300 million dollar investment by the government of Singapore. The powers that be would like nothing better than to conduct all their business behind closed doors, keeping the rest of us in the dark until they lower the boom. It is one of the critical roles of community organizations, that is, community groups, newspapers and listservs, to counteract this tendency by keeping us informed, not ignorant. My own experience has suggested to me that there are some people who are afraid of the listserv. In the past, during the brief attempt to stop the demolition of 4224-26 Baltimore Avenue, I was advised off-list by one person to refrain from posting on this topic, as Councilwoman Blackwell was working behind the scenes and that discussions on the list would be counterproductive (yeah, right). Someone else mailed me off-list on the same topic in a message that was both patronizing and insulting. I have also had a message hijacked from this list to the other, God only knows why. The overall impression I get from this is that some people do not like the open and free exchange of information and ideas that this list represents. Does that mean they think the list, when the chips are down, can actually have an impact? Mary -Original Message- From: Karen Allen kallena...@msn.com To: UnivCity Listserv univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Tue, Apr 13, 2010 11:49 am Subject: [UC] Dueling Listservs Since we're discussing the relative merits of the two primary neighborhood listservs, I'd like to make one observation: The actual reason UC Neighbors doesn't have rancor or hostility on its list is basically because they rarely talk about anything controversial there that would arouse rancor or hostility. They created that list with that in mind, and serves a defined audience. None or very few of the controversial issues that burned hot on UC List were even mentioned on UC Neighbors. I observed that once in a while someone would cross-post a response to a UC discussion to UCNeighbors, but usually no further discussion took place there. I remember that UCNeighbors was spawned by Kyle Cassidy in (I think) 2006 because there had been some really nasty exchanges going back and forth on UC list over UCD's BID proposal. UCNeighbors was definitely around during the Campus Inn fight (that controversy first arose when an article appeared in the October 12, 2007 edition of UCReview, and was finally resolved in early June, 2009). I did a search of my undeleted email with the term ucneighbors, and found 12 pages (over 400 emails) of UC Neighbors posts dating back to August 2007. Overall the consistent topics were: missing pets, recycling, home repair and contractor recommendations, meet-ups, clean-ups, crime alerts, schools, cultural events and general announcements; basically the same things that appear on the UC list. There were no posts mentioning Campus Inn. The only somewhat controversial discussion there had to do with the closing of the Kingsessing branch library. Since I was actively involved in fighting the hotel, I intentionally saved all emails on that topic for reference. A similar email search using the term campus inn produced the first 400 emails, dating from April 28, 2008 until June 8, 2009. All of the list-generated posts came from UC List; not one of the 400 emails had UCNeighbors in the from heading. By contrast, UC Listserv talks
[UC] correction: 43rd and Baltimore - James Campenella
Sorry, the name of the developer at 43rd and Baltimore is James, not Joe, Campenella. He pled guilty in Federal court for his bribery of a BRT tax assessor named James Lynch. In return for a $20,000 bribe, Mr. Lynch lowered the tax assessment on four properties Campenella was involved with. One of the buildings he re-assessed was the Western Union Building at 11th and Locust. He lowered its assessment from $4.6 to $1.6 million. Campenella's defense? He just wanted to spare himself the lawyer's fees necessary to challenge the city's assessment! I can't say for sure, but I assume that since he was appearing before a Federal judge, he said this with a straight face. Don't get me started on the property taxes on 43rd and Baltimore. When I checked the BRT site around the time of the demolition of the building there, I noticed that the new owner had not paid any property taxes for over a year. I contacted the BRT in February of last year (before the Inquirer series) and asked how come a $3 million property that had been owned by a for-profit developer for over a year was assessed at $0. He replied that it took time for the BRT to recognize such a change and to collect the taxes. He told me that my tax assessment, when they got around to it, would be about $80,000 annually. I quickly informed him that I was not the owner, merely a tax-paying neighbor. To my amazement, not too long after, the property's BRT record showed an assessment of around $80,000! The owners obviously got to work on that and had it reduced to around $8,000, as I recall. (Since, Mr. Lynch had been fired from the BRT, I wonder who they called.) I haven't looked at the BRT site since then. I am astonished however, that this multi-million dollar property is assessed at less than double the amount of my Pine Street twin. (How does this compare with what you pay in property tax?) I would guess that this is one of the reasons for the city's foot-dragging over the overhauling of the assessments of real estate in Philadelphia - how to limit the damage to all the well-connected who have benefitted for years from unjustifiably low assessments. This is a classic example of what I call the Philadelphia Dilemma: how can a politician respond to the taxpayer's demands for action, while protecting the special interests that he/she believe sustain him/her. Is this situation common outside our city, our era? Of course. But I believe that the long history and profoundly harmful effects of this conflict in Philadelphia have earned it naming rights. The Inquirer reports only confirmed probably the worst-kept secret in Philadelphia - that the BRT was run by a bunch of corrupt and incompetent patronage hacks. Mary P.S. So, all you lawyers, journalists, real estate agents, politicians and just plain neighbors who are more plugged in than I am: Do any of you know what is planned for 43rd and Baltimore? Does anyone have a suggestion for a good use for this large and nicely-situated property?
Re: [UC] Another neighborhood screwed, Daily News- don't forget 43rd and Baltimore Avenue
Glenn, I think there is indeed a relationship between the city's abrupt turnover of the property in Susquehanna and what is going on in our neighborhood. Even more apropos than Clark Park's immediate fate is, in my opinion, the disposition of the property at 43rd and Baltimore, once belonging to the city (i.e., to us, the taxpayers) and now in the hands of a private developer. This developer's first action was to tear down a house that, arguably, was qualified for historic certification and protection from demolition and that inarguably contributed to the unique character of our neighborhood's streetscape. The neighborhood remains in the dark about what his plans are for this important corner. In fact,the disposition of the Baltimore Avenue property might provide a case study in the unseemly involvement of our politicians and city administrators in real estate deals that, at a minimum, do not pass the smell test and are certainly at odds with the needs and desires of the community. Over a decade ago, the city transferred this large lot and set of buildings to the non-profit Women Against Abuse, which turned it into a shelter for abused women and children. (I believe there was also a community garden on the property). About two years ago, the non-profit sold the property to Thylen Associates of New York for a sum in excess of $3 million. What did the taxpayer get back? Nuthin! What did Women Against Abuse do with the money? They used it to construct a new women's shelter. Did they spend their tax-payer donated windfall wisely, you might ask? Well, all I know is that, shortly after, a front page story appeared in the Philadelphia Weekly lamenting the fact that the agency was suffering such severe fiscal difficulties that it had to cease providing its clients any aid beyond the bare minimum of a roof and food. All job counseling and psychological services previously provided to these needy women and children were suspended. A visit to the organization's web site at the time (last year) showed its administrators grinning in a photo with Joe Campenella, convicted felon, contractor for 43rd and Baltimore and FOJB (friend of Jannie Blackwell). Yes, this is the same Campenella who wanted to turn the property across from West Catholic into a homeless shelter a few years back. At that time, Ms. Blackwell introduced a bill in City Council to circumvent city laws, permitting a long-term, high-rent sweetheart of a deal for Mr. Campenella. Publicity in the Inquirerer and neighborhood opposition helped kill that project. But, Mr. Campenella clearly has his eye on our neighborhood, and he is nothing if not persistent! God (and maybe Jannie) only know what he and his associates have in mind for this prime property overlooking Clark Park! So, there is certainly a pattern here, I believe, of (some corrupt, some possibly well-intended) developers, politicians and non-profits engaging in a particular type of real estate shenanigan. Politicians and their associates help developers get ahold of city-owned property and make money off of it, (hold your nose here!) while using the cover of providing needed social services. All to the detriment of Philadelphia taxpayers and the surrounding neighborhoods. The Inquirer shone a light on the homeless shelter proposal and helped stop that. It is now questioning the involvement of city administrators and their spouses in the Susquehanna elderly housing proposal. Maybe they'll step in, if the time comes, and help us stop any inappropriate development at 43rd and Baltimore. Mary -Original Message- From: Glenn glen...@earthlink.net To: UnivCity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 3:36 pm Subject: [UC] Another neighborhood screwed, Daily News Support the people of the Susquehanna neighborhood! This is what isplanned for parks, schools, rec centers and all other public spaces. Letter in the Daily News (link below): IF ANY resident of the Susquehanna neighborhood had been asked if thebasketball courts at the Duckrey School at 15th and Susquehanna areused and needed, the answer would be yes! Because there was no community input, the School Reform Commissiondeems this land to be unused and unnecessary. As adults claim to be concerned about flash mobs, and to beconcerned about children being obese, a basketball court is conveyedfor development without notification. Our politicians, in a deal that lacks transparency, have started aprocess for development without the community's knowledge. Community participation is owed to any community. With all thevacant land available in the 5th Council District, it was trulyunnecessary to take this away from our youth! Especially to give awayfor $1 with the city's budget problems. We will work to stop this unauthorized land deal! Judith Robinson, Philadelphia
Re: [UC] FOCP response
Does anyone know why Mr. Chance does not subscribe to this listserve? I would expect the leader of a local civic association to be connected to as many sources of local information and activities as possible. What about our other civic leaders (e.g. at the Spruce Hill Community Association, the UC Historical Society and Cedar Park Neighbors) and our local politicians (Mrs. Blackwell, for instance and ward leaders and committee members)? Mary -Original Message- From: Glenn glen...@earthlink.net To: univcity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sun, Apr 11, 2010 7:42 am Subject: [UC] FOCP response Sorry, I forwarded this response from FOCP earlier but it did not get posted: Responses from FOCP, Mr Chance: Glenn-- Your issue remains moot. If you want to post that interpretation anywhere feel free to do so. Glenn-- Robert's Rules indicates that the Chair (in this case the President of the Association) can determine by estimating the house whether there is a quorum. If no member calls for an official count of the house, a quorum is assumed to be present. Since no call was made, all actions taken are legal according to the bylaws. As the meeting has now ended (several months ago) any calls for a quorum count are moot at this time. A member who wishes to contest the election may of course bring this up at a future meeting, but no member has come forward to do so at this point. By the way, by my informal count there were 18 members in the room, satisfying our quorum of 10% of members in good standing, since the Friends of Clark Park had 172 members as of that night. So any assertion on your part that the FoCP is running illegally is nonsense. However, we will be happy for your assistance in bringing greater attendance to future meetings. The next Membership Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 16 at 7 PM in Griffith Hall. I'll be happy to supply flyers to you if you are willing to help us post them in the park and around the neighborhood. The next election meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 20, 7 PM in Griffith Hall. If you would like to run for President of FoCP you will need to be a member before that date. Thank you for your ongoing concern for our organization. Perhaps someday you will learn how to address your concerns directly to me instead of to a listserve to which you know I do not subscribe. FLC Frank L. Chance President, Friends of Clark Park chanc...@gmail.com On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Brian Siano wrote: FYI. Since Glenn's not a member, I see no reason to be concerned. Neighbors, The FOCP refused my request for the minutes of their election.Once again, rules only apply to those outside of the insular inner FOCP gang. Robert's Rules is very specific for good reason. The example, that even unanimous consent about some minor issue, is not allowed; emphasizes the point. If a quorum does not exist, the meeting itself is invalid, period. How can members, not present, object to an election or any other business? This hope for manipulating parliamentary tricks, so often abused, is laughable. On the night of the election, I publicly posted the names of FOCP members present and publicly reported that FOCP did not have a quorum for the election. I had chased Fran around the room to see her list of members and informed Frank Chance and Tony West that the election was not valid 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.
Fwd: [UC] on the UCLipServ
-Original Message- From: mcget...@aol.com To: owner-univc...@list.purple.com Sent: Wed, Mar 31, 2010 1:19 pm Subject: Re: [UC] on the UCLipServ Excuse me, Craig, but were you serious or were you mocking when you wished the blessings of Passover and Easter on the listserve members? The limitations of email messages makes it difficult to tell your tone. I ask this because invoking the bible in order to skewer someone you disagree with doesn't seem to be in the spirit of either Passover or Easter. As for Mr. Lussenhop, he's perfectly entitled to ignore the listserve, but he does so at his peril, I believe. -Original Message- From: craigso...@aol.com To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Cc: glen...@earthlink.net Sent: Wed, Mar 31, 2010 12:03 pm Subject: Re: [UC] on the UCLipServ In a message dated 3/31/2010 14:38:47 Eastern Daylight Time, glen...@earthlink.net writes: It's important to look at power imbalances and abuses, when you wish to consider the causes of incivility snip BID steering committeessnip Master Plan Steering Committees snip Clark Park Partnerships snip Spruce Hill zoning committees! Crazy ranters snip to expose secret plots snip secret Clark Park Partnership snip FOCP Board is too damn stupid snip While you continue to be a listserv bully, you fall somewhat short of being an intellectual bully; how disappointing. No good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit; for each tree is known by its own fruit. Figs are not gathered from thorns, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush. The good person out of the good treasure of the heart produces good, and the evil person out of evil treasure produces evil; for it is out of the abundance of the heart that the mouth speaks. - Luke 6:43-45 (NRSV) May the blessings of Passover and Easter be abundantly available to Purple's members. Craig
[UC] Re: ucneighbors Digest, Vol 24, Issue 9 Campus Inn
Elisabeth, Don't know how my posting got onto this list. Guess it was forwarded by Cindy Miller. In replying to Mr. West's original comments on the UnivCity list regarding the disposition of 40th and Pine, it was not my intention to renew the debate over that unfortunate property. I think everyone pretty much knows all the arguments. I merely meant to respond to Mr. West's astonishing suggestion that Penn engage in the deliberate neglect of an historic structure in order to hasten its collapse. While I could not tell whether he was serious or not, I did feel compelled to advise him that what he was proposing was, in fact, illegal. Mary **We found the real ‘Hotel California’ and the ‘Seinfeld’ diner. What will you find? Explore WhereItsAt.com. (http://www.whereitsat.com/#/music/all-spots/355/47.796964/-66.374711/2/Youve-Found-Where-Its-At?ncid=eml cntnew0007)
Re: [UC] Late breaking news about the Campus Inn
A wise owner would nudge the building at 40th and Pine toward collapse, huh? How about an antisocial and unethical owner! Are you aware that what you are counseling is not only appalling, but illegal? Toll Brothers attempted to destroy the historic Naval Home through neglect until the courts forced them to maintain it. As for the economics of restoring the mansion and developing the site in a suitable fashion - well, Penn is poised to spend hundreds of millions on developing the Post Office site, so they can certainly afford to spend some money at 40th and Pine. They don't need to worry about their return on investment, that's for sure. Furthermore, you routinely present yourself as a journalist. Do journalists deal in scuttlebutt? If you know anything factual about the plans for the 43rd and Baltimore site, then perhaps you should do a service to your neighbors and be more explicit. The fate of that property is extremely important to the neighborhood and I suspect that the owners indeed had very definite intentions when they paid $3.5 million for it. Or do they spend that kind of money on a whim? I think most people would find it unsettling that the contractor (James Campenella) who knocked down the buildings is a convicted felon (for bribing a tax assessor in 2007) and that the owner (Campenella's partner in previous real estate deals) has not paid any property taxes since its purchase in January, 2008. I know I get a little heartburn when I think of the economic woes of the city and fat cat developers from New York getting a free ride for a year and a half on a multi-million dollar property. You may recall that Campenella had so much influence with our Councilwoman Blackwell that she introduced a special bill into City Council which would have permitted him to develop a large homeless shelter across from West Catholic. This bill would have locked the city into an unconscionably long lease and cost the taxpayers millions in inflated rent. The extraordinary bill raised questions in the press, the neighbors reacted and the project was scrapped. Now this guy is taking another whack at our neighborhood and I am very concerned. So, if you know anything about the plans for 4224-26 Baltimore, then you should probably let the community in on it, so it is not caught flat-footed, as it was when the buildings were demolished. **We found the real ‘Hotel California’ and the ‘Seinfeld’ diner. What will you find? Explore WhereItsAt.com. (http://www.whereitsat.com/#/music/all-spots/355/47.796964/-66.374711/2/Youve-Found-Where-Its-At?ncid=eml cntnew0007)
[UC] City Council Parks Bill Pulled - a Victory for Now
I totally agree with Glenn. Krajewski has unwittingly revealed how eager some quarters are to exploit the new arrangement for supervising our parks. In this case, however, she shot herself in the foot with a preposterously broad proposal to open up all of Fairmount Park to developers. Her claim that this legislation was only intended to address some problems at Glen Foerd lacks credibility. For instance, why would specific issues regarding the catering operation at Glen Foerd require new legislation to include permission to build single-family residences in the park? You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to suspect what's behind that proposal. Particularly troubling was the tepid response of the new man in charge of parks and recreation, Michael DiBerardinis. Saying (in the Inquirer, 5/19) that he was concerned about the broad nature of the proposed legislation, he promised to attempt to rein it in! Is it unreasonable to expect the commissioner charged with protecting our parks to clearly and firmly oppose such a threatening bill? Either he is a master of tact, allowing Krajewski to save face while opposing her legislation behind the scenes, or he is just another pol. Only time will tell. Thanks to Karen for bringing this issue to the attention of the list. The vigilance of organizations such as SCRUBS and the Philadelphia Parks Alliance stands in sad contrast to the poor performance of our own neighborhood organizations with regard to the 40th and Pine hotel project and the destruction of the historic building at 43rd and Baltimore. Mary **Recession-proof vacation ideas. Find free things to do in the U.S. (http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/domestic/national-tourism-week?ncid=emlcntustrav0002)
[UC] Parks Threatened
I found SCRUB's message about Krajewski's proposed legislation in City Council to essentially open up all of Fairmount Park to commercial development so absolutely incredible that I decided to wait for another source to confirm before voicing my outrage. I did suspect, however, that if the news were accurate, someone with deep pockets had gotten to our esteemed Concilwoman. Indeed, this morning's edition of the Inquirer confirms that the principle of follow-the-money never fails, at least in Philadelphia! It seems that this piece of legislation, whose scope is so broad and so voracious, is only intended, according to its backer, to address some issues regarding a single particular site: Glen Foerd, a historic mansion on the Delaware River, whose building and grounds are part of the Fairmount Park system. These have been under license for quite a few years to a very successful catering company, Conroy Caterers and it seems clear that the push for this legislation must be related somehow to their operations. I called the office of the non-profit group that runs the site, the Glen Foerd Conservancy, and inquired about the issues involved. Not unexpectedly, I got the brush-off by the woman in the business office (I don't really know... this is all just happening today...this is being handled by the board of trustees...you'll have to speak to one of them, etc). It was obvious that she had been instructed not to answer any questions. Fair enough, but remember, the city does own the site and taxpayers have footed the bill for plenty of restorations through government grants. I have no beef with Conroy Catering. Indeed, we had a very enjoyable family celebration there a few years ago and found them to be perfectly agreeable people. They provide a legitimate service very well and keep a fair number of people working. But they are clearly ambitious and have expanded their business greatly over the last few years. They even had a run-in with LI over excessive noise a few years back. One can only imagine what they might want to do at this site that would require Krajewski to introduce legislation with such a stunning potential for harm to our entire park system and, hence, to the city as a whole. As lame as the Fairmount Park Commission sometimes seemed to be, I voted against its abolition and the placement of the parks more directly under city control. I sensed that there would be trouble-in-store if that happened and I have not been disappointed, just shocked that it came so fast. Our City Council - so slow to produce any meaningful change, so quick to pounce on the main chance! Mary **Recession-proof vacation ideas. Find free things to do in the U.S. (http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/domestic/national-tourism-week?ncid=emlcntustrav0002)
[UC] Rally tomorrow - 4224-26 Baltimore
I received an e-mail from the other list announcing a protest scheduled for tomorrow morning, 8:00AM, at the site. Don't know who's organized it. Mary **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID %3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)
Re: [UC] demolition at 4224-4226 Baltimore Avenue
Banner headline? How about stop the presses! I walked by the property early this evening and the demolition has already commenced. The porches and back bay on the right-side building have been taken down and the interior of the building is now exposed to the weather. Oddly, there is NO permit posted anywhere on the property. I'd like to know where is SHCA on this occasion? Isn't it a fundamental principle of the association to encourage the preservation of single-family homes, including the re-conversion of dwellings to single-family whenever possible? Mary **A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=fe bemailfooterNO62)
Re: [UC] demolition at 4224-4226 Baltimore Avenue
Thanks, Dave. The Philadelphia: Build page of LI's web site indicates that the previous owner of the property was the non-profit Women Against Abuse, which provides services, including housing, for women and children who are victims of domestic violence. Apparently, the tax-exempt status of the property was never adjusted when it was purchased by the for-profit real estate developer, Lenard Thylen, James Campenella's associate. So far, this owner seems to have avoided for over a year the payment of taxes on a property worth $3,500,000. Given the city's serious budget crisis, I find this somewhat annoying. Indeed, I would have thought, given Campenella's history, that he and his partners would be more careful about paying their taxes. By the way, Campenella's partners on previous real estate ventures have interesting histories themselves. One, Sean McDougall, specializes in building community-based correctional facilities (jails) while another, Eric Seidman, is notorious for threatening historic structures through his development efforts on behalf of Walgreen's drugstores ( two Art Deco buildings on Chestnut Street and the 18th-century tavern, The Black Horse Inn, on Bethlehem Pike). While I think it's unlikely that anyone would ever propose putting a jail or drug rehab center across the street from Clark Park, I do think it's reasonable to have some concerns about what may be planned for Baltimore Avenue. Mary **Nothing says I love you like flowers! Find a florist near you now. (http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=floristncid=emlcntusyelp0002)
[UC] demolition at 4224-4226 Baltimore Avenue
When I read that the demolition permit had a June, 2008 date crossed out and handwritten in was a January, 2009 date, and, in addition, that the original LI supervisor's name (Gallagher from the Western District) had also been crossed out and replaced with the name Perry Cocco, who works out of the 11th and Wharton office of LI, I smelled a rat and decided to do a little googling. I think that the neighborhood now has good reason to fear what will be proposed for that site when the historically-contributing building there is demolished. Just a few facts to ponder: -The site was bought by Thylen Associates, a New York-based developer in Jan., 2008 for $3,500,000. Can you imagine what kind of a project they need to assure them of a decent return on an investment of this magnitude? -Thylan, Campenella and a man named Sean D. McDougall jointly developed a site at 13th and Race called the Lithograph Lofts, the renovation of an old factory structure into residences. -Sean McDougall is the owner of a company called Minsec Corrections Corp., based in Wallingford. Their business is in what they call Community Corrections Facilities, which are essentially privately-run jails located in , guess what?, communities! They also run drug re-hab facilities. Their web site (_www.minsec.com_ (http://www.minsec.com) ) explains how their expertise lies in locating and purchasing sites and building these correctional facilities in co-operation with local government. (Are we starting to have any flashbacks yet to the deal Campenella worked out with Jannie Blackwell over the proposed shelter at 45th and Chestnut St., a deal that was astonishing in its attempt to circumvent city laws, but only defeated because of local opposition.) The Minsec website also touts Mr. McDougall as the head of a multi-million dollar real estate enterprise. -Campenella has a drug distribution conviction from 1993 ( a youthful indiscretion no doubt - he was only in his forties at the time) and most recently (2007) was charged with paying a $20,000 bribe to a city tax assessor to lower the assessments on 4 different properties he owns by millions of dollars. The news accounts suggest that he pled guilty to the charges but I haven't been able to confirm that. He appears to be a free man, so I guess he didn't get the full 5 years that was the maximum for this crime of corrupting a public official. It seems pretty clear to me that the current owners of 4224 Baltimore had requested a permit to demolish last year with the expectation that the hotel project was close to a done deal, that the precedent for large non-residential projects had been established and that their project would thus be likely to win approval. Of course, the tough fight against the hotel upset their timetable and they had to get a new permit, one starting in January this year. I think one would have to be awfully naive not to suspect that the fix is probably in on the hotel project and that these guys have gotten the word. They are now set to proceed on whatever they have planned for two nineteenth-century structures and one of the last plots of open land in our community. Mary **The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards. AOL Music takes you there. (http://music.aol.com/grammys?ncid=emlcntusmusi0002)
Re: [UC] I wonder how enthusiastic Campus Inn's supposed backers are these da...
Al, Wish I could share your optimism about the poor financial condition of Extended Stay Hotel as a hopeful sign in the fight to stop the Campus Inn project. However, I believe the partner with Adelman, Lussenhop and Penn is the Hersha Hotel Group, which just released a fairly good third quarter 2008 report. I suspect Adelman is feeling no pain financially, not with the $1.1 billion dollar backing he gets from the government of Singapore's real estate investment arm. And Penn is dealing with any potential downturn in its fortunes the good ol' American way - it's laying off workers! So, unfortunately, I believe the bad economy does not necessarily represent an impediment to the Campus Inn project's ultimate success. Only the honesty and decency of the members of the involved city commissions can stand in its way, so I think one can be forgiven for being a little pessimistic. **Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dpicid=aolcom40vanityncid=emlcntaolcom0010)
Re: [UC] I wonder how enthusiastic Campus Inn's supposed backers are these da...
Well, to start with, 18 researchers at the University Museum, many with decades of employment at, and contributions to, the institution. **Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dpicid=aolcom40vanityncid=emlcntaolcom0010)
