Re: [UC] Clark Park announcements on this list

[Glenn]

FOCP Leader:
These are community issues, so I think there's a good reason to do
this. I can't imagine this become a bother or problem on the list, but
if there's a huge objection, let me know.


People of West Philly!

Now that the park is completely controlled by the secret invitation only Clark Park 
Partnership, we get this fake desire for transparency from FOCP!  Of course, the FOCP is fighting 
for freedom and democracy-haha.



Forevermore, the people of West Philly will only get marketing ads from the 
Penn partnership, and not participation in decisions which effect public spaces 
like Clark Park! Passing on new marketing literature and propaganda should have 
always been expected to be the role for FOCP leaders after the new power 
structure was sealed.


Remember, these leaders were zealots for secrecy when protecting the takeover 
and redesign of Clark Park!  Public announcements and inclusion would have been 
extremely important over the past ten years, when they wouldn't allow it!  If 
FOCP leaders had actually had a recent change of heart about transparency, they 
would be blowing the whistle about the details of the SECRET MEETINGS over the 
past ten years, so people could better organize to win back their rights!


But the expectation of new FOCP/UCD marketing ads for the commercialized park 
may only be part of this new attempt at fake transparency by FOCP leaders.



The FOCP leadership was only important to the corporate plutocrats and their 
gentrification before the park was privatized!  As these FOCP leaders lose their illusion 
of personal power, they will most certainly attempt to rebrand the FOCP as a responsible 
organization looking out for the good of the community.  They don't want to 
be personally cast out of neighborhood society, as they always attempted against 
dissenters.


And remember, FOCP is the same dysfunctional organization it was yesterday, 
when it sold out the people of this neighborhood and the people of 
Philadelphia!  As the full reality of privatization is now out in the open, the 
FOCP leaders will be facing a great deal of blowback for their years as 
arrogant Penn pawns!  Lacking real courage, they will deny their role in the 
privatization and portray themselves as blameless victims.


And those powerbrokers, who used the techniques of feudal and colonial 
domination over these leaders, know that they have established a dependency so 
that FOCP leaders must act as their rubber stamp or they will be replaced.

Believing that FOCP can reform under these leaders and continue with the 
usual contempt for the basic principles of a republic and citizen participation, is a 
monumental mistake for anyone in this neighborhood and city!

While we can only speculate about the full meaning of this attempt at FOCP 
rebranding, the one thing that it is surely not-IT IS NOT A NEW FOUND RESPECT 
FOR TRANSPARENCY OR INCLUSION OF ALL NEIGHBORS!

With open eyes,
Glenn



On 6/28/2011 7:39 PM, Brian Siano wrote:

Over at the Friends of Clark Park website
(http://www.friendsofclarkpark.org), I've set up a system where
subscribers are sent emails notifying them of new posts. So, maybe two
or three times a week at the very outside, our list of roughly 600
people gets an email that tells them there's a new news item at our
site.

In order to reach more people, I'd like to add this mailing list as a
subscriber. If we do this, then, perhaps two or three times a week at
the _very_ most, a note will come through announcing something new at
the site.

These are community issues, so I think there's a good reason to do
this. I can't imagine this become a bother or problem on the list, but
if there's a huge objection, let me know.

If you'd like to be added to the subscription list independently, send
me an email and I'll add you to our own lists.

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.



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.901 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3731 - Release Date: 06/28/11 
02:34:00

Re: [UC] Clark Park

[Richard Conrad]

Darco, Bill, and Tony, 

Brian answered me with absurdly sarcastic and abusive rhetoric so exaggerated 
as to be insipid and cruel.

Are you going to ignore my several attempts to find some resolution, as if I 
deserved no comment?

Do you all just need to cultivate only antagonistic rapport... or is there 
something stuck in your craws.

Is Glenn actually correct?  If Glenn is really wrong, then we can go back to 
sharing Clark Park, right?

Is it possible that the idea of demonstrations, free public gatherings, free 
popular events are not going to be allowed?

PLEASE, Show him to be wrong not by abusing but by acting in concert and in 
good faith.  

Just a couple words of good intent would help a lot.

I'm asking for some public commitment not a fight for the park.

Defuse the issue.  Stand up for your country / and for your country's people.


There is a way to be sure we are getting onto the same page...

YOU HAVE SAID THAT NO ONE IS EXCLUDED FROM THE PARK.  
SO THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEM WITH CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS 
(eg.): TO PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY TO PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, BEING 
EXERCISED THEREIN?

On Apr 29, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Glenn Moyer wrote:

 The department of Recreation works for the taxpayers and is required to 
 protect the rights of all citizens as directed by the US Constitution.  

Not more than a couple days ago the Supreme Court by a (5-4) or ($-4) vote, 
ignored the MAJOR body of definitions and precedents regarding CONTRACT LAW and 
FRAUD by saying a company (ATT) could exclude patrons of due process - in 
recourse to Class Action Suits - merely by the insertion IN FINE PRINT of a 
clause stating that such was the case +/or a condition of having services 
provided through the contract(s).  IT TOTALLY BOGGLES MY MIND and I just hope 
and pray that MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WILL SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING and SHARE MY ANGST! 
 It basically said that Corporations could make up the rules and ignore the 
concepts of FAIR actions in regards to contractual  understandings.  The 
constitution has been interpreted as protecting all our rights against (for 
what should be an ABSURD example), deceitful intent to deprive citizens of 
basic interests in regards to life, liberty, and property.  If that is not a 
class action what the hell is??  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-arkush/us-supreme-court-to-major_b_854714.html
 

   U.S. Supreme Court to Major Corporations: You Write the Rules
pubc.it
On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with ATT in ATT Mobility v. 
Concepcion -- a decision with devastating consequences for consumer protection 
and civil rights.


I actually believe Penn is fairly trustworthy to make decisions when I am not 
involved... I REALLY want that to be true!

BUT I AM DAMNED SURE THE FIVE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT WHO MADE THIS AND 
MANY, MANY, LIKE DECISIONS, ARE NOT

NOT!  CAPABLE OF ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS NOR SERVING THE 
CONSTITUTION!!! 
NOT!  CAPABLE OF SERVING IN GOOD BEHAVIOR!

AS SOON AS CLARK PARK IS AVAILABLE AGAIN I SUGGEST WE USE IT FOR PEACEABLE 
ASSEMBLY... TO CONDUCT TEACH-INS... TO FOSTER GATHERINGS OF MASS 
CONSCIOUSNESS... AND TO DISCUSS AND ACT UPON THIS AND OTHER ISSUES. 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Glenn]

Ric,

I want to publicly thank you for confronting the use of a straw man.  
One of the reasons that this technique is so ubiquitous is to intimidate 
and silence everyone else.


Tony knows that he will never silence or intimidate me.  He is trying to 
send a message to the rest of the list and community when he attempts 
these techniques.  His message is all about power.


Anyone who dares to question the abuse of power is to watch how he 
attempts to crush his target.


Confronting these techniques empowers others in this community to stand 
up and speak out!  In the end, bully's are exposed.


Thanks,
Glenn
PS:  The other FOCP board members have left Tony unleashed to use these 
tactics against this community for years.  WHAT DOES THEIR SILENCE SAY 
ABOUT THE FOCP BOARD




On 4/29/2011 12:43 AM, Richard Conrad wrote:

You are reading in.  You don't play fair.  You just can't admit it.

Glenn does not say as Darco implied that people were excluded from 
the park (and actually people have been - you and everyone else can 
probably realize that people are routinely told to leave the park, for 
sleeping overnight and other reasons).  Maybe Glenn refers to private 
Clark Park banquets with high priced entry fees.  Maybe he refers to 
private gatherings hosted by Penn where the public is excluded.  'Penn 
Control' is something about which while Glenn has held back from 
giving it ultimate vilification, he warns people to be concerned. 
 'Secrecy' is the most difficult to prove (duh, it's a secret), but in 
any case you ridicule by hyperbole, misrepresent his remarks, and say 
things that are not true.


You now seem to be practically accusing me of being a Trump conspiracy 
talk supporter.  You clearly haven't read much of what I have written 
(or you are resorting to damaging written public falsification again).


I am actually a true Balder who believes Donald Trump can't be Pres. 
because he can't prove his hair was born in the U.S.A.  Here is 
something of mine I posted to FB:


Saying Trump appeals to masochistic dupes with no sense of 
mathematics, to sadistic voyeurs who wish they had balls, or to racist 
instincts in those of lesser intelligence, is all the same... they're 
just the facts Jack!


Bill Mahr did better: Bill Maher says, Hey Trump, what's the biggest 
scam ever NOW? I'd say its a guy with 3 bankruptcies telling America 
how to get its financial house in order.


Crackpot.  That is what you say Tony, instead of answering others 
criticisms!  Surely you are big enough to deal with others concerns 
and not to only resort to name calling.  Be fair.


Rick

On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Anthony West wrote:


Richard,

I quote from Glenn's text, which Darco and I have read quite clearly:

The master plan for 'revitalization' of Clark Park was always a 
master plan for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!


Glenn has, for years, been publishing on this list false allegations 
that various users were *planned to be excluded from the park *by 
this nefarious conspiracy. Since none of them ever were, in fact, 
excluded from the physical park, and there were, in fact, no plans 
that any users should be excluded from the park -- he is now 
attempting to befuddle you -- as well as unsuspecting newcomers -- by 
pretending some users were excluded from *planning for the park. *And 
he's trying to muddle the two together with murky conspiracy-theory 
language, where what we're talking about shifts every time a claim of 
fact is contested.


Of course, nothing of the sort ever happened. (There wasn't any 
secrecy or any Penn control either.) I looked into these 
allegations very carefully in 2002-03.


Typical Trump talk, in my opinion. But if this is what floats your 
boat, I sure can't stop you. Conspiracy-theory crackpots never run 
out of gas, do they?


--Tony West



On 4/28/2011 11:28 PM, Richard Conrad wrote:
O.K. let's get real!  Darco represents Glenn as saying something he 
did not.  Darco asks:

do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park?

Glenn did not ever say in his communique that people were excluded 
from the park.






No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3603 - Release Date: 04/28/11 
14:34:00

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Richard Conrad]

Dear Glenn, 

I appreciate your gratitude and quite concur with your astute identification of 
straw man bullying.  I hope you are mistaken about Tony's message being all 
about power and still hope that he will come to his senses and apologize for 
his unfair behaviors in attacking you, and then me, but I won't predict the 
future.  The same goes for Darco and Bill.  If we intend to continue community 
growth and stave off fascistic corporate medievalism we had all better 
seriously watch our hands in dealing with those amongst our own ranks and 
neighborhoods.

Rick
 
On Apr 29, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Glenn wrote:

 Ric,
 
 I want to publicly thank you for confronting the use of a straw man.  One of 
 the reasons that this technique is so ubiquitous is to intimidate and silence 
 everyone else.
 
 Tony knows that he will never silence or intimidate me.  He is trying to send 
 a message to the rest of the list and community when he attempts these 
 techniques.  His message is all about power.  
 
 Anyone who dares to question the abuse of power is to watch how he attempts 
 to crush his target.  
 
 Confronting these techniques empowers others in this community to stand up 
 and speak out!  In the end, bully's are exposed.
 
 Thanks,
 Glenn
 PS:  The other FOCP board members have left Tony unleashed to use these 
 tactics against this community for years.  WHAT DOES THEIR SILENCE SAY ABOUT 
 THE FOCP BOARD
 
 
 
 On 4/29/2011 12:43 AM, Richard Conrad wrote:
 
 You are reading in.  You don't play fair.  You just can't admit it.  
 
 Glenn does not say as Darco implied that people were excluded from the 
 park (and actually people have been - you and everyone else can probably 
 realize that people are routinely told to leave the park, for sleeping 
 overnight and other reasons).  Maybe Glenn refers to private Clark Park 
 banquets with high priced entry fees.  Maybe he refers to private gatherings 
 hosted by Penn where the public is excluded.  'Penn Control' is something 
 about which while Glenn has held back from giving it ultimate vilification, 
 he warns people to be concerned.  'Secrecy' is the most difficult to prove 
 (duh, it's a secret), but in any case you ridicule by hyperbole, 
 misrepresent his remarks, and say things that are not true.  
 
 You now seem to be practically accusing me of being a Trump conspiracy talk 
 supporter.  You clearly haven't read much of what I have written (or you are 
 resorting to damaging written public falsification again).  
 
 I am actually a true Balder who believes Donald Trump can't be Pres. 
 because he can't prove his hair was born in the U.S.A.  Here is something of 
 mine I posted to FB:  
 
 Saying Trump appeals to masochistic dupes with no sense of mathematics, to 
 sadistic voyeurs who wish they had balls, or to racist instincts in those of 
 lesser intelligence, is all the same... they're just the facts Jack!
 
 Bill Mahr did better:  Bill Maher says, Hey Trump, what's the biggest scam 
 ever NOW? I'd say its a guy with 3 bankruptcies telling America how to get 
 its financial house in order.
 
 Crackpot.  That is what you say Tony, instead of answering others 
 criticisms!  Surely you are big enough to deal with others concerns and not 
 to only resort to name calling.  Be fair.
 
 Rick
 
 On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Anthony West wrote:
 
 Richard,
 
 I quote from Glenn's text, which Darco and I have read quite clearly:
 
 The master plan for 'revitalization' of Clark Park was always a master 
 plan for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!
 
 Glenn has, for years, been publishing on this list false allegations that 
 various users were planned to be excluded from the park by this nefarious 
 conspiracy. Since none of them ever were, in fact, excluded from the 
 physical park, and there were, in fact, no plans that any users should be 
 excluded from the park -- he is now attempting to befuddle you -- as well 
 as unsuspecting newcomers -- by pretending some users were excluded from 
 planning for the park. And he's trying to muddle the two together with 
 murky conspiracy-theory language, where what we're talking about shifts 
 every time a claim of fact is contested.
 
 Of course, nothing of the sort ever happened. (There wasn't any secrecy 
 or any Penn control either.) I looked into these allegations very 
 carefully in 2002-03. 
 
 Typical Trump talk, in my opinion. But if this is what floats your boat, I 
 sure can't stop you. Conspiracy-theory crackpots never run out of gas, do 
 they?
 
 --Tony West
 
 
 
 On 4/28/2011 11:28 PM, Richard Conrad wrote:
 
 O.K. let's get real!  Darco represents Glenn as saying something he did 
 not.  Darco asks: 
  
 do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park?
 
 Glenn did not ever say in his communique that people were excluded from 
 the park.
 
 
 
 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
 Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3603 - 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Glenn]

Rick,

I tend to be optimistic.  For over a decade, I worked with serious drug 
addicts and ex-prisoners.  Only those of us with abundant optimism 
manage to do that work successfully-haha.



Darco seems reasonable and I hope he considers our criticism 
constructively.  I think it's out of character, and that is part of the 
reason I snapped back at him.


 I just dismiss tweets like Bill's and don't know anything about him 
other than being a block captain.  But I've noticed disturbing patterns 
with some other block captains in our area.  The current FOCP prez and 
former Spruce Hill Civic Association prez became my block commander as 
soon as he moved to West Philly!  That experience has been terrible!


But I would certainly accept a sincere apology from Bill, without prejudice.


Unfortunately, I've been dealing with Tony since 2003 and his behavior 
has always been consistent.  I'm not sure how long you've been 
subscribed to this list, but he has a long history here, and as the 
leader of the FOCP Board.  I haven't been the only target over the 
years.  Straw man is one of Tony West's favorite tactics.  And he will 
not stop, even when he should realize that he is making a fool of 
himself.  What I call his Evil Ray series is infamous!


I think he thought he was successful when he had a gang of people, who 
joined him in a type of group straw man tactic on the list.  Tony would 
create the straw man, and then the group would post a series of nasty 
posts at the target, as if they were all too stupid to understand the 
meaning of the original post.


 After their gangs' tactics were thoroughly exposed on this list, they 
left and formed a separate list sponsored by the Annenberg school at 
Penn. I believe you know this ucneighbors.  They used the threat of 
censorship to intimidate the other subscribers, who came from this 
listserv.  They were even caught bragging about their power to silence 
about 5 of us, who told the truth about neighborhood issues.  (A real 
estate agent named, Melani, thought it would be heaven if I were 
silenced with the power of Penn's computers-haha.)


After some of us made fun of them, they closed off the archives to the 
public-haha.  It was a violation of a couple of Penn's written policies. 
  (I informed the office of the President of the University that I 
intended to expose this as widely as I could manage, and I believe they 
were eventually kicked off the Penn system.)  It still bothers me that 
Penn allowed bold censorship against its neighboring community for such 
a long time!  (I spent years giving 100% for the reputation of Penn when 
I worked for the addiction treatment research center.)



But Tony has continued to use these discredited techniques here, without 
the ucneighbors back-up.  I've often deconstructed his posts to remind 
people about fallacious arguments and how they are used to bully.   He 
actually provides the list with great texts for study.


Take care,
Glenn




On 4/29/2011 9:42 AM, Richard Conrad wrote:

Dear Glenn,

I appreciate your gratitude and quite concur with your astute 
identification of straw man bullying.  I hope you are mistaken about 
Tony's message being all about power and still hope that he will come 
to his senses and apologize for his unfair behaviors in attacking you, 
and then me, but I won't predict the future.  The same goes for Darco 
and Bill.  If we intend to continue community growth and stave off 
fascistic corporate medievalism we had all better seriously watch our 
hands in dealing with those amongst our own ranks and neighborhoods.


Rick

On Apr 29, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Glenn wrote:


Ric,

I want to publicly thank you for confronting the use of a straw man.  
One of the reasons that this technique is so ubiquitous is to 
intimidate and silence everyone else.


Tony knows that he will never silence or intimidate me.  He is trying 
to send a message to the rest of the list and community when he 
attempts these techniques.  His message is all about power.


Anyone who dares to question the abuse of power is to watch how he 
attempts to crush his target.


Confronting these techniques empowers others in this community to 
stand up and speak out!  In the end, bully's are exposed.


Thanks,
Glenn
PS:  The other FOCP board members have left Tony unleashed to use 
these tactics against this community for years.  WHAT DOES THEIR 
SILENCE SAY ABOUT THE FOCP BOARD




On 4/29/2011 12:43 AM, Richard Conrad wrote:

You are reading in.  You don't play fair.  You just can't admit it.

Glenn does not say as Darco implied that people were excluded from 
the park (and actually people have been - you and everyone else can 
probably realize that people are routinely told to leave the park, 
for sleeping overnight and other reasons).  Maybe Glenn refers to 
private Clark Park banquets with high priced entry fees.  Maybe he 
refers to private gatherings hosted by Penn where the public is 
excluded.  'Penn Control' is 

RE: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Lalevic, Darco]

I apologize for any misinterpretation on my part, however the general tone of 
most of Glenn's emails is that the public is excluded from use of the park, of 
which I have seen little evidence (disregarding law enforcement - see below).
While I tend to agree with many of Glenn's general opinions regarding rising 
corporatism and oppression of the middle and lower classes in society, I grow 
weary of his long rants and little factual evidence regarding the local 
conspiracy. Most of his evidence presented is the rejection of his 
participation in FOCP - the exclusion of his voice. And honestly, it seems 
mostly vindictive to me. Very rarely does he present a cooperative attitude.

Ok, so the A park has been closed for some time for renovations. To me, I see a 
waste of money. Yes, I bet it will be nice and prettier - but it's still a city 
park and some efforts are wasteful in my opinion (reseeding grass in the bowl). 
But at the same time, if that money wasn't spent (wasted?) on Clark Park, it 
would have been elsewhere. Ok, so the dog park didn't happen (I'm a big 
supporter of the idea). But I also see the negative sides to it. University 
City's gentrification (I don't know what else to call it) over the last 15 
years has had plenty of positive as well as negative effects. Having a private 
party in the park is just as much a right for Penn as it is for any group to 
hold an event. Does Penn have an idea of what they want to see in Clark Park, 
the neighborhood, and the City? Of course they do - they have a vested interest 
in all of that. Are they not supposed to voice their opinions? Is UCD not 
mostly driven by Penn (and Drexel, and other University City power brokers)? Of 
course it is.

I have been critical of FOCP - and have disagreed with plenty of decisions. I 
have disagreed with some policies of the UCD. That's why I've become more 
involved.
And while the issue of police enforcement (harassment of people sleeping in the 
park, public drinking, etc) is a complicated one which I don't think is handled 
properly, I also understand that in fact, that is the law, whether or not I 
agree with it.

My point is, the best evidence that Glenn can come up with is his denial to be 
on the dog committee. I can fully understand that, since I've rarely seen 
evidence of Glenn being compromising. While Tony and I have had disagreements 
regarding policies, he has actually encouraged me to become more involved. So, 
I'm faced with on one hand Glenn telling me how evil and bad FOCP is, and on 
the other being asked to participate, despite disagreeing with policies and 
plans of both UCD and FOCP. Now Glenn will surely say I am being assimilated 
and will shortly become a puppet of the evil FOCP.

Darco

PS- I wholeheartedly agree with Glenn regarding the big picture of our 
society and actually appreciate his emails most of the time. But occasionally 
they just annoy me enough that I need to respond.


From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Richard Conrad
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 12:43 AM
To: Anthony West
Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

You are reading in.  You don't play fair.  You just can't admit it.

Glenn does not say as Darco implied that people were excluded from the park 
(and actually people have been - you and everyone else can probably realize 
that people are routinely told to leave the park, for sleeping overnight and 
other reasons).  Maybe Glenn refers to private Clark Park banquets with high 
priced entry fees.  Maybe he refers to private gatherings hosted by Penn where 
the public is excluded.  'Penn Control' is something about which while Glenn 
has held back from giving it ultimate vilification, he warns people to be 
concerned.  'Secrecy' is the most difficult to prove (duh, it's a secret), but 
in any case you ridicule by hyperbole, misrepresent his remarks, and say things 
that are not true.

You now seem to be practically accusing me of being a Trump conspiracy talk 
supporter.  You clearly haven't read much of what I have written (or you are 
resorting to damaging written public falsification again).

I am actually a true Balder who believes Donald Trump can't be Pres. because 
he can't prove his hair was born in the U.S.A.  Here is something of mine I 
posted to FB:


Saying Trump appeals to masochistic dupes with no sense of mathematics, to 
sadistic voyeurs who wish they had balls, or to racist instincts in those of 
lesser intelligence, is all the same... they're just the facts Jack!

Bill Mahr did better:  Bill Maher says, Hey Trump, what's the biggest scam 
ever NOW? I'd say its a guy with 3 bankruptcies telling America how to get its 
financial house in order.

Crackpot.  That is what you say Tony, instead of answering others criticisms! 
 Surely you are big enough to deal with others concerns and not to only resort 
to name calling.  Be fair.

Rick

On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:00 AM

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Brian Siano]

Lemme see if I have this straight.

Real-state investor uses a soapbox to yell about crazy, baseless
conspiracy theories. Most of the evidence offered rests on assertions,
suppositions, insinuations, and claims of fact that evaporate beyond
the guy's say-so. There's also a comical insistence that he is the
real community activist, the genuine patriot, the true American. But
his history has been one of hostility to the concerns of others in his
community. In fact, he's always characterized people who disagree with
him as fools, knaves, fascists, foreign interlopers and thugs who want
to interfere with his personal use of public space.

But the real estate investor continues. Because every so often,
_someone_ out there is tricked into believing that he shares their
interests and political outlook, and demagogues see followers as their
personal vindication. And since refuting the claims would take more
energy than they're worth, the guy goes unanswered... so he claims
that the silence is his vindication, too.

Finally, when this nonsense has gone on long enough, the real-estate
guy's targets respond. Maybe they, too, are a little testy, which is
understandable after putting up with this for so long. But he claims
this, too, as a vindication, as proof that he was right all along. I
made them _reply_. I made them _listen to me_. That makes me
_important_.

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.

RE: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Lalevic, Darco]

But you see, I agree with Glenn on a basic level. Of course Penn wants to 
influence things around it. It's also always the people or companies with 
political power or money who have the greatest influence, that's how our 
society works (fortunately or unfortunately). But he takes it to another level. 
 I'm sorry, but Clark Park is just not that important to Penn.
And as far as conspiracies, I'm curious what reasoning the FOCP would have to 
sell out to Penn or any other entity. I mean, did I miss out where they were 
handing out cash to people to vote a certain way? After all, that is the Philly 
way when it comes to politics.

-Original Message-
From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Brian Siano
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 1:16 PM
Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

Lemme see if I have this straight.

Real-state investor uses a soapbox to yell about crazy, baseless conspiracy 
theories. Most of the evidence offered rests on assertions, suppositions, 
insinuations, and claims of fact that evaporate beyond the guy's say-so. 
There's also a comical insistence that he is the real community activist, the 
genuine patriot, the true American. But his history has been one of hostility 
to the concerns of others in his community. In fact, he's always characterized 
people who disagree with him as fools, knaves, fascists, foreign interlopers 
and thugs who want to interfere with his personal use of public space.

But the real estate investor continues. Because every so often, _someone_ out 
there is tricked into believing that he shares their interests and political 
outlook, and demagogues see followers as their personal vindication. And since 
refuting the claims would take more energy than they're worth, the guy goes 
unanswered... so he claims that the silence is his vindication, too.

Finally, when this nonsense has gone on long enough, the real-estate guy's 
targets respond. Maybe they, too, are a little testy, which is understandable 
after putting up with this for so long. But he claims this, too, as a 
vindication, as proof that he was right all along. I made them _reply_. I made 
them _listen to me_. That makes me _important_.

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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Glenn]

On 4/29/2011 12:30 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:
I apologize for any misinterpretation on my part, however the general 
tone of most of Glenn's emails is that the public is excluded from use 
of the park, of which I have seen little evidence


Darco,

You just did it again.  Maybe if you would work on your reading skills, 
you would not be so annoyed and annoying.  This is completely untrue!


I have reported for the past 10 years that the public, and park user 
groups, have been intentionally excluded from the park planning meetings 
and the backroom deals regarding major changes to Clark Park.  Why do 
you continue to seriously misrepresent my positions and then get annoyed 
at the false positions?


If you agree with my big picture view, as you say, you would know that I 
am committed to the principals of democratic societies.  Transparency 
and inclusion are the most fundamental principles of a republic, and 
when a society abandons these they will always lose their rights.  Those 
principles and rights are not just vital for national issues but also 
for local issues.  The idea that these principles can be abandoned in 
hopes of trickle down corporate money, and brought back when it's 
really important is absurd.  That is the stupidity that caused the 
collapsing of America, and the evil that is being done to my oppressed 
brothers and sisters around the planet !


This slippery slope of part time principles, that you seem to have faith 
in, was rampant in this neighborhood. It compelled me to stand up to the 
mad rush for plutocracy, which was obvious under the Penn gentrification 
model ten years ago. I knew that I would be abused for taking a 
principled stand and for trying to get our sleepwalking neighbors to 
wake up!  I happened to be quite involved with Clark Park when Penn 
decided to save the neighborhood, and called me and my neighbors 
criminals!  I was in the position to blow the whistle and have always 
considered it my duty.



 I grow weary of his long rants and little factual evidence regarding 
the local conspiracy.



What annoyed others, who've told me to shut up, was the incredible body 
of evidence that I made public using this listserv!Each time I 
publicly demanded the time, date, and location of secret meetings, I was 
in fact providing evidence that the public was excluded!


Other readers could watch and see that West, Siano, etc. never ever gave 
the meeting information, but instead responded with a blitz of mean 
spirited comments attacking my character.  They could look at the 
University City Review and see that the meetings, which should have been 
announced by order of the members of FOCP, were never there! And they 
were able to know that secret meetings were taking place at which they 
were unwelcome. The readers on this list have watched this evidence for 
years.  I've continuously proved that these meetings were not public.  
Today, the Clark Park Partnership calls this exclusion, invitation only 
meetings.  It's fact and if you don't believe me then you need to do a 
little work.


What other evidence can I show you from secret meetings which none of us 
attended?  Some people have recently thanked me for my dedication to 
blowing the whistle, and others who are not on this list, told me that 
they didn't know that these abuses were occurring.  BUT THEY WISHED THEY HAD


How do you respond to important evidence?

Darco writes:  My point is, the best evidence that Glenn can come up 
with is his denial to be on the dog committee. I can fully understand 
that, since I've rarely seen evidence of Glenn being compromising.


So your response to evidence is nothing more than ad hominem!  Ad 
hominem is a fallacy of logic too.  For the past few years, FOCP leaders 
have claimed that their members can always join any committee, and I 
alone was unwelcome because I'm selfish.  I provided you evidence that 
proved that was not true, whether or not you have the ability to 
understand it.  It also proved that FOCP leaders continued to lie about 
inclusion continuously over many years.   Why should I look for more 
evidence for you, when you can't understand it, and simply dismiss it as 
proof of my bad character?


Regarding FOCP leaders, I'm not having a debate with reasonable mature 
neighbors. I've concentrated on exposing bullying, lies, processes 
unacceptable to any neighborhood in a democratic society, etc.  Under 
these conditions, compromising is an absurd choice for your words.   How 
exactly does one compromise when power is abused to bully?  How did I 
organize Clark Park festivals, volleyball, and work on a world class 
health care research team, if I don't have the ability to work well with 
mature reasonable adults?



Darco writes:  Does Penn have an idea of what they want to see in Clark 
Park, the neighborhood, and the City? Of course they do -- they have a 
vested interest in all of that. Are they not supposed to voice their 
opinions?



Here we go 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

On 4/29/11 12:30 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:

University City’s gentrification (I
don’t know what else to call it) over the last 15 years has had plenty
of positive as well as negative effects.




the main negative effect is that we now have a staunchly divided 
neighborhood. and it's a big effect, one which will continue to carry 
penn -- and its catspaws ucd and campus apartments and so-called 
community association leaders -- farther and farther. an advance that 
feeds the very divisiveness that fuels their progression.


in case you missed it first time around, you now get a second chance to 
watch, in real time, the same strategic university narratives as they 
begin their next mighty roll:




http://articles.philly.com/2010-10-05/news/24976839_1_drexel-university-neighborhood-university-city-district



http://articles.philly.com/2011-04-18/news/29443549_1_drexel-campus-drexel-university-powelton-village



[if you can detect the contradiction behind the fact that such articles 
even need to be written today, 15 years after penn has claimed such 
success in transforming university city, then count yourself as someone 
who's already pretty observant.]



..
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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Mike V.]

In my years of experience on this listserv, I have found that the best way to 
read Glenn's posts involve substituting Penn or UCD or Clark Park 
Committee or whoever his bogeyman-du-jour is with the Martians, Sasquatch 
or, occasionally, the pixies that live in my teeth.  Then I picture him 
typing away in his egg-stained bathrobe, an old remote control duct-taped to 
his forehead and his teeth blacked out with magic marker in an effort to keep 
the black helicopters from reading his neutral patterns.

Not only its this immensely entertaining, but I have found that it diminishes 
the cogency, relevance and believability of his rants not one iota.

- Mike V.

Glenn glen...@earthlink.net wrote:



On 4/29/2011 12:30 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:
 I apologize for any misinterpretation on my part, however the general 
 tone of most of Glenn's emails is that the public is excluded from use 
 of the park, of which I have seen little evidence

Darco,

You just did it again.  Maybe if you would work on your reading skills, 
you would not be so annoyed and annoying.  This is completely untrue!

I have reported for the past 10 years that the public, and park user 
groups, have been intentionally excluded from the park planning meetings 
and the backroom deals regarding major changes to Clark Park.  Why do 
you continue to seriously misrepresent my positions and then get annoyed 
at the false positions?

If you agree with my big picture view, as you say, you would know that I 
am committed to the principals of democratic societies.  Transparency 
and inclusion are the most fundamental principles of a republic, and 
when a society abandons these they will always lose their rights.  Those 
principles and rights are not just vital for national issues but also 
for local issues.  The idea that these principles can be abandoned in 
hopes of trickle down corporate money, and brought back when it's 
really important is absurd.  That is the stupidity that caused the 
collapsing of America, and the evil that is being done to my oppressed 
brothers and sisters around the planet !

This slippery slope of part time principles, that you seem to have faith 
in, was rampant in this neighborhood. It compelled me to stand up to the 
mad rush for plutocracy, which was obvious under the Penn gentrification 
model ten years ago. I knew that I would be abused for taking a 
principled stand and for trying to get our sleepwalking neighbors to 
wake up!  I happened to be quite involved with Clark Park when Penn 
decided to save the neighborhood, and called me and my neighbors 
criminals!  I was in the position to blow the whistle and have always 
considered it my duty.


  I grow weary of his long rants and little factual evidence regarding 
the local conspiracy.


What annoyed others, who've told me to shut up, was the incredible body 
of evidence that I made public using this listserv!Each time I 
publicly demanded the time, date, and location of secret meetings, I was 
in fact providing evidence that the public was excluded!

Other readers could watch and see that West, Siano, etc. never ever gave 
the meeting information, but instead responded with a blitz of mean 
spirited comments attacking my character.  They could look at the 
University City Review and see that the meetings, which should have been 
announced by order of the members of FOCP, were never there! And they 
were able to know that secret meetings were taking place at which they 
were unwelcome. The readers on this list have watched this evidence for 
years.  I've continuously proved that these meetings were not public.  
Today, the Clark Park Partnership calls this exclusion, invitation only 
meetings.  It's fact and if you don't believe me then you need to do a 
little work.

What other evidence can I show you from secret meetings which none of us 
attended?  Some people have recently thanked me for my dedication to 
blowing the whistle, and others who are not on this list, told me that 
they didn't know that these abuses were occurring.  BUT THEY WISHED THEY HAD

How do you respond to important evidence?

Darco writes:  My point is, the best evidence that Glenn can come up 
with is his denial to be on the dog committee. I can fully understand 
that, since I've rarely seen evidence of Glenn being compromising.

So your response to evidence is nothing more than ad hominem!  Ad 
hominem is a fallacy of logic too.  For the past few years, FOCP leaders 
have claimed that their members can always join any committee, and I 
alone was unwelcome because I'm selfish.  I provided you evidence that 
proved that was not true, whether or not you have the ability to 
understand it.  It also proved that FOCP leaders continued to lie about 
inclusion continuously over many years.   Why should I look for more 
evidence for you, when you can't understand it, and simply dismiss it as 
proof of my bad character?

Regarding FOCP leaders, I'm not having a debate with reasonable mature 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Richard Conrad]

 Thank you Darco very much... I was really not expecting an apology (despite my 
quixotic claim to the contrary), and even a terse, partial, and perhaps 
conditional one felt rather warm and fuzzy to me...  You reason well and speak 
honestly and sincerely about your concerns but then you slam Glenn to the mat 
by 'representing' him through a broken glass bloodily.  Your in-kind 
conciliation minus your harsh hyperbole is a clear and formidable formulaic 
success!  Right or wrong your opinion can be judged on it's own merits without 
you also destroying Glenn's through your inappropriate 'restatements' of what 
he seems to you to have said.  I do see a huge return to civility and somewhat 
of a return to mutual understanding and respect.  As I said before, (though now 
let my sentiment be restated in Benj. Franklin's famous aphorism):  we can all 
hang together or surely we will all hang separately.  If you truly feel 
someone is running around screaming the sky is falling ask them to tone down 
their screaming.  BUT!  If you restate it as the sky is falling and what they 
actually said was it's raining more now than it used to do then it is you and 
not they who deserves strict censure.  Rick Conrad

   
On Apr 29, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Glenn wrote:

 
 
 On 4/29/2011 12:30 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:
 
 I apologize for any misinterpretation on my part, however the general tone 
 of most of Glenn’s emails is that the public is excluded from use of the 
 park, of which I have seen little evidence
 
 Darco, 
 
 You just did it again.  Maybe if you would work on your reading skills, you 
 would not be so annoyed and annoying.  This is completely untrue!
 
 I have reported for the past 10 years that the public, and park user groups, 
 have been intentionally excluded from the park planning meetings and the 
 backroom deals regarding major changes to Clark Park.  Why do you continue to 
 seriously misrepresent my positions and then get annoyed at the false 
 positions?
 
 If you agree with my big picture view, as you say, you would know that I am 
 committed to the principals of democratic societies.  Transparency and 
 inclusion are the most fundamental principles of a republic, and when a 
 society abandons these they will always lose their rights.  Those principles 
 and rights are not just vital for national issues but also for local issues.  
 The idea that these principles can be abandoned in hopes of trickle down 
 corporate money, and brought back when it's really important is absurd.  
 That is the stupidity that caused the collapsing of America, and the evil 
 that is being done to my oppressed brothers and sisters around the planet !
 
 This slippery slope of part time principles, that you seem to have faith in, 
 was rampant in this neighborhood. It compelled me to stand up to the mad rush 
 for plutocracy, which was obvious under the Penn gentrification model ten 
 years ago. I knew that I would be abused for taking a principled stand and 
 for trying to get our sleepwalking neighbors to wake up!  I happened to be 
 quite involved with Clark Park when Penn decided to save the neighborhood, 
 and called me and my neighbors criminals!  I was in the position to blow the 
 whistle and have always considered it my duty.  
 
 
  I grow weary of his long rants and little factual evidence regarding the 
 local conspiracy.
 
 
 What annoyed others, who've told me to shut up, was the incredible body of 
 evidence that I made public using this listserv! Each time I publicly 
 demanded the time, date, and location of secret meetings, I was in fact 
 providing evidence that the public was excluded!  
 
 Other readers could watch and see that West, Siano, etc. never ever gave the 
 meeting information, but instead responded with a blitz of mean spirited 
 comments attacking my character.  They could look at the University City 
 Review and see that the meetings, which should have been announced by order 
 of the members of FOCP, were never there! And they were able to know that 
 secret meetings were taking place at which they were unwelcome. The readers 
 on this list have watched this evidence for years.  I've continuously proved 
 that these meetings were not public.  Today, the Clark Park Partnership calls 
 this exclusion, invitation only meetings.  It's fact and if you don't 
 believe me then you need to do a little work. 
 
 What other evidence can I show you from secret meetings which none of us 
 attended?  Some people have recently thanked me for my dedication to blowing 
 the whistle, and others who are not on this list, told me that they didn't 
 know that these abuses were occurring.  BUT THEY WISHED THEY HAD
 
 How do you respond to important evidence?
 
 Darco writes:  My point is, the best evidence that Glenn can come up with is 
 his denial to be on the dog committee. I can fully understand that, since 
 I’ve rarely seen evidence of Glenn being compromising.
 
 So your response to evidence is 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Richard Conrad]

One thing seems to ring true, 
very sad, but sometimes also true I should say... 

In the realm of political debate:  
One often only does one's best work when one's adversaries make it 
particularly difficult to do it!

Now, enough!   Let us start to get along DAMN IT!


On Apr 29, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Glenn wrote:

 
 
 On 4/29/2011 12:30 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:
 
 I apologize for any misinterpretation on my part, however the general tone 
 of most of Glenn’s emails is that the public is excluded from use of the 
 park, of which I have seen little evidence
 
 Darco, 
 
 You just did it again.  Maybe if you would work on your reading skills, you 
 would not be so annoyed and annoying.  This is completely untrue!
 
 I have reported for the past 10 years that the public, and park user groups, 
 have been intentionally excluded from the park planning meetings and the 
 backroom deals regarding major changes to Clark Park.  Why do you continue to 
 seriously misrepresent my positions and then get annoyed at the false 
 positions?
 
 If you agree with my big picture view, as you say, you would know that I am 
 committed to the principals of democratic societies.  Transparency and 
 inclusion are the most fundamental principles of a republic, and when a 
 society abandons these they will always lose their rights.  Those principles 
 and rights are not just vital for national issues but also for local issues.  
 The idea that these principles can be abandoned in hopes of trickle down 
 corporate money, and brought back when it's really important is absurd.  
 That is the stupidity that caused the collapsing of America, and the evil 
 that is being done to my oppressed brothers and sisters around the planet !
 
 This slippery slope of part time principles, that you seem to have faith in, 
 was rampant in this neighborhood. It compelled me to stand up to the mad rush 
 for plutocracy, which was obvious under the Penn gentrification model ten 
 years ago. I knew that I would be abused for taking a principled stand and 
 for trying to get our sleepwalking neighbors to wake up!  I happened to be 
 quite involved with Clark Park when Penn decided to save the neighborhood, 
 and called me and my neighbors criminals!  I was in the position to blow the 
 whistle and have always considered it my duty.  
 
 
  I grow weary of his long rants and little factual evidence regarding the 
 local conspiracy.
 
 
 What annoyed others, who've told me to shut up, was the incredible body of 
 evidence that I made public using this listserv! Each time I publicly 
 demanded the time, date, and location of secret meetings, I was in fact 
 providing evidence that the public was excluded!  
 
 Other readers could watch and see that West, Siano, etc. never ever gave the 
 meeting information, but instead responded with a blitz of mean spirited 
 comments attacking my character.  They could look at the University City 
 Review and see that the meetings, which should have been announced by order 
 of the members of FOCP, were never there! And they were able to know that 
 secret meetings were taking place at which they were unwelcome. The readers 
 on this list have watched this evidence for years.  I've continuously proved 
 that these meetings were not public.  Today, the Clark Park Partnership calls 
 this exclusion, invitation only meetings.  It's fact and if you don't 
 believe me then you need to do a little work. 
 
 What other evidence can I show you from secret meetings which none of us 
 attended?  Some people have recently thanked me for my dedication to blowing 
 the whistle, and others who are not on this list, told me that they didn't 
 know that these abuses were occurring.  BUT THEY WISHED THEY HAD
 
 How do you respond to important evidence?
 
 Darco writes:  My point is, the best evidence that Glenn can come up with is 
 his denial to be on the dog committee. I can fully understand that, since 
 I’ve rarely seen evidence of Glenn being compromising.
 
 So your response to evidence is nothing more than ad hominem!  Ad hominem is 
 a fallacy of logic too.  For the past few years, FOCP leaders have claimed 
 that their members can always join any committee, and I alone was unwelcome 
 because I'm selfish.  I provided you evidence that proved that was not true, 
 whether or not you have the ability to understand it.  It also proved that 
 FOCP leaders continued to lie about inclusion continuously over many years.   
 Why should I look for more evidence for you, when you can't understand it, 
 and simply dismiss it as proof of my bad character? 
 
 Regarding FOCP leaders, I'm not having a debate with reasonable mature 
 neighbors. I've concentrated on exposing bullying, lies, processes 
 unacceptable to any neighborhood in a democratic society, etc.  Under these 
 conditions, compromising is an absurd choice for your words.   How exactly 
 does one compromise when power is abused to bully?  How did I organize Clark 
 Park 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Richard Conrad]

Darco and Tony, There is a way to be sure we are getting onto the same page...

YOU HAVE SAID THAT NO ONE IS EXCLUDED FROM THE PARK.  
SO THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEM WITH CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS 
(eg.): TO PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY TO PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, BEING 
EXERCISED THEREIN?

On Apr 29, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Glenn Moyer wrote:

 The department of Recreation works for the taxpayers and is required to 
 protect the rights of all citizens as directed by the US Constitution.  

Not more than a couple days ago the Supreme Court by a (5-4) or ($-4) vote, 
ignored the MAJOR body of definitions and precedents regarding CONTRACT LAW and 
FRAUD by saying a company (ATT) could exclude patrons of due process - in 
recourse to Class Action Suits - merely by the insertion IN FINE PRINT of a 
clause stating that such was the case +/or a condition of having services 
provided through the contract(s).  IT TOTALLY BOGGLES MY MIND and I just hope 
and pray that MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WILL SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING and SHARE MY ANGST! 
 It basically said that Corporations could make up the rules and ignore the 
concepts of FAIR actions in regards to contractual  understandings.  The 
constitution has been interpreted as protecting all our rights against (for 
what should be an ABSURD example), deceitful intent to deprive citizens of 
basic interests in regards to life, liberty, and property.  If that is not a 
class action what the hell is??  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-arkush/us-supreme-court-to-major_b_854714.html
 

   U.S. Supreme Court to Major Corporations: You Write the Rules
pubc.it
On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with ATT in ATT Mobility v. 
Concepcion -- a decision with devastating consequences for consumer protection 
and civil rights.


I actually believe Penn is fairly trustworthy to make decisions when I am not 
involved... I REALLY want that to be true!

BUT I AM DAMNED SURE THE FIVE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT WHO MADE THIS AND 
MANY, MANY, LIKE DECISIONS, ARE NOT

NOT!  CAPABLE OF ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS NOR SERVING THE 
CONSTITUTION!!! 
NOT!  CAPABLE OF SERVING IN GOOD BEHAVIOR!

AS SOON AS CLARK PARK IS AVAILABLE AGAIN I SUGGEST WE USE IT FOR PEACEABLE 
ASSEMBLY... TO CONDUCT TEACH-INS... TO FOSTER GATHERINGS OF MASS 
CONSCIOUSNESS... AND TO DISCUSS AND ACT UPON THIS AND OTHER ISSUES. 

RE: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Lalevic, Darco]

So, I'm curious. While I tended to disagree with some of the revitalization 
plan, do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park? And don't 
give me general intimidation that you have felt - I would like a concrete 
example of someone being excluded. And no, the fence being up while the changes 
are made does not count as exclusion since (regardless of it's merits) the 
revitalization does require people to stay out of the construction.

Also, can you respond in a few short sentences? I just want to know of one 
example of someone being excluded from the park.

Thanks.

Darco


From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 12:11 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

Dear Newcomers,

I'm glad many of you have an interest in the history behind the privatization 
of Clark Park.  Many long term West Philly residents didn't have a reasonable 
chance to understand what was happening before the fence went up, and neither 
could you.  As we enter the 2nd season of the closure and fencing of the north 
part, it is a very relevant time for all to learn or review the history of the 
past ten years.

The master plan for revitalization of Clark Park was always a master plan for 
secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!  You need to know that 
nothing about the redesign of Clark Park was continuous from beginning to end 
(2001-2011), except the demand for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and 
exclusion of park subcultures!  (Except for replacing trees, it's completely 
different from the earlier version.)


 The original Master Plan Steering Committee was hand picked and CLOSED before 
the news of a scheme to redesign Clark Park was publicly revealed 10 years ago! 
 This committee was filled by local corporations and politicians called 
stakeholders.  These individuals did not tend to attend the actual meetings, 
which were closed and secret with no public records.

Organized by UCD/Penn, a few of the leaders from the most dysfunctional civic 
associations or clubs were also brought on to the secret committee.  
Specifically, leaders of The Friends of Clark Park (FOCP), Spruce Hill Civic 
Association and Regent Square civic association joined.

For a couple of years previously, I had been harassed by these FOCP leaders 
because of my role as founder and chief organizer of the Clark Park Music and 
Arts Community (CPMAC).  At the time, the FOCP had no recognized power and was 
the laughing stock by department of recreation employees.  They were widely 
recognized as ridiculous bullies, neighborhood cranks.  (See The Battle of 
the Bowl, City Paper, 2001)
http://archives.citypaper.net/articles/102501/news.park.shtml?print=1

Of course, when the secret UCD/Penn committee was revealed ten years ago; I 
immediately attempted to gain access for ALL park stakeholder groups as well as 
our own CPMAC. (This was how I became so closely involved and saw the 
privatization coming).  I knew the goals of the FOCP leadership to control the 
park, and so I had inside understanding of the serious importance of breaking 
through the iron wall of the secret committee.  (The Master Plan Steering 
Committee was organized through U of Penn powerbrokers primarily in the real 
estate department).
 Throughout the entire process all park user groups were successfully barred 
from the secret meetings!

Chronology:  First we had this UCD master plan committee.  Their plan was 
largely rejected by locals.  On the first try, they attempted to use PUBLIC 
presentations (a regularly used technique that was severely tightened after 
this huge failure), but the public backlash delayed immediate implementation of 
the park redesign as early as 2003.  (It was a great example of the simple 
power and need for public meetings.  The public meetings represented the 
public, and their opinions about the park were right on target.)

Next, the master plan steering committee was transformed into the FOCP planning 
committee for several years.  Members were kept anonymous.  This was justified 
as a matter of confidentiality.  Meetings were kept secret with no public 
information.  This FOCP committee was called the community for several years 
in all of the press releases designed to silence any public dissent about the 
privatization or redesign.

Friends of Clark Park leaders acted as shields for secrecy and exclusion over 
these years.  It was their job to keep the meetings away from the public and 
bar participation from park user groups!  (I often publicly confronted their 
leaders during that time forcing them to use various techniques to silence my 
demand for public meetings and inclusion.)


A hopeful moment:  In 2004, I publicly brought a motion to the FOCP general 
membership that would have allowed identification and inclusion of all park 
stakeholders at meetings which would be made public. The membership 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Glenn]

Also, can you respond in a few short sentences? I just want to know of 
one example of someone being excluded from the park.



No, I will not answer your silly question.   There is overwhelming 
evidence that park stakeholders were barred from the planning committees 
over the past 10 years.



Your question suggests a possible reading comprehension problem.  As in 
the past, I'd be happy to answer any serious questions.  I respect you 
and deserve a serious response from you.  All the best.



Sincerely,
Glenn



On 4/28/2011 3:59 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:


So, I'm curious. While I tended to disagree with some of the 
revitalization plan, do you have evidence of people being excluded 
from the park? And don't give me general intimidation that you have 
felt -- I would like a concrete example of someone being excluded. And 
no, the fence being up while the changes are made does not count as 
exclusion since (regardless of it's merits) the revitalization does 
require people to stay out of the construction.


Also, can you respond in a few short sentences? I just want to know of 
one example of someone being excluded from the park.


Thanks.

Darco

*From:*owner-univc...@list.purple.com 
[mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] *On Behalf Of *Glenn

*Sent:* Thursday, April 28, 2011 12:11 PM
*To:* UnivCity@list.purple.com
*Subject:* [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

Dear Newcomers,

I'm glad many of you have an interest in the history behind the 
privatization of Clark Park.  Many long term West Philly residents 
didn't have a reasonable chance to understand what was happening 
before the fence went up, and neither could you.  As we enter the 2^nd 
season of the closure and fencing of the north part, it is a very 
relevant time for all to learn or review the history of the past ten 
years.


The master plan for revitalization of Clark Park was always a master 
plan for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!  You need 
to know that nothing about the redesign of Clark Park was continuous 
from beginning to end (2001-2011), except the demand for secrecy, 
exclusion of the public, and exclusion of park subcultures!  (Except 
for replacing trees, it's completely different from the earlier version.)


 The original Master Plan Steering Committee was hand picked and 
CLOSED before the news of a scheme to redesign Clark Park was publicly 
revealed 10 years ago!  This committee was filled by local 
corporations and politicians called stakeholders.  These individuals 
did not tend to attend the actual meetings, which were closed and 
secret with no public records.


Organized by UCD/Penn, a few of the leaders from the most 
dysfunctional civic associations or clubs were also brought on to the 
secret committee.  Specifically, leaders of The Friends of Clark Park 
(FOCP), Spruce Hill Civic Association and Regent Square civic 
association joined.


For a couple of years previously, I had been harassed by these FOCP 
leaders because of my role as founder and chief organizer of the Clark 
Park Music and Arts Community (CPMAC).  At the time, the FOCP had no 
recognized power and was the laughing stock by department of 
recreation employees.  They were widely recognized as ridiculous 
bullies, neighborhood cranks.  (See The Battle of the Bowl, City 
Paper, 2001)


http://archives.citypaper.net/articles/102501/news.park.shtml?print=1

Of course, when the secret UCD/Penn committee was revealed ten years 
ago; I immediately attempted to gain access for ALL park stakeholder 
groups as well as our own CPMAC. (This was how I became so closely 
involved and saw the privatization coming).  I knew the goals of the 
FOCP leadership to control the park, and so I had inside understanding 
of the serious importance of breaking through the iron wall of the 
secret committee.  (The Master Plan Steering Committee was organized 
through U of Penn powerbrokers primarily in the real estate department).


 Throughout the entire process all park user groups were successfully 
barred from the secret meetings!


Chronology:  First we had this UCD master plan committee.  Their plan 
was largely rejected by locals.  On the first try, they attempted to 
use PUBLIC presentations (a regularly used technique that was severely 
tightened after this huge failure), but the public backlash delayed 
immediate implementation of the park redesign as early as 2003.  (It 
was a great example of the simple power and need for public meetings.  
The public meetings represented the public, and their opinions about 
the park were right on target.)


Next, the master plan steering committee was transformed into the FOCP 
planning committee for several years.  Members were kept anonymous.  
This was justified as a matter of confidentiality.  Meetings were kept 
secret with no public information.  This FOCP committee was called 
the community for several years in all of the press releases 
designed to silence any public dissent about the privatization or 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Richard Conrad]

Darco,  

I must agree with Glenn that you have most clearly misinterpreted what Glenn 
wrote and you should read it again more closely.  

Although, in fact I might point out, as control by private parties increases, 
particularly when park spaces are leased or sold to private parties, it can 
become a matter of others being excluded.  

There are many places in Fairmount Park right now which are private property, 
and where you are quite forbidden to trespass.   

Rick Conrad   

On Apr 28, 2011, at 8:04 PM, Glenn wrote:

 Also, can you respond in a few short sentences? I just want to know of one 
 example of someone being excluded from the park.
  
 No, I will not answer your silly question.   There is overwhelming evidence 
 that park stakeholders were barred from the planning committees over the past 
 10 years.
 
 Your question suggests a possible reading comprehension problem.  As in the 
 past, I'd be happy to answer any serious questions.  I respect you and 
 deserve a serious response from you.  All the best.
 
 Sincerely,
 Glenn
 
 
 On 4/28/2011 3:59 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:
 
 So, I’m curious. While I tended to disagree with some of the revitalization 
 plan, do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park? And don’t 
 give me general intimidation that you have felt – I would like a concrete 
 example of someone being excluded. And no, the fence being up while the 
 changes are made does not count as exclusion since (regardless of it’s 
 merits) the revitalization does require people to stay out of the 
 construction.
  
 Also, can you respond in a few short sentences? I just want to know of one 
 example of someone being excluded from the park.
  
 Thanks.
  
 Darco
  
  
 From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] 
 On Behalf Of Glenn
 Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 12:11 PM
 To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
 Subject: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11
  
 Dear Newcomers,
  
 I’m glad many of you have an interest in the history behind the 
 privatization of Clark Park.  Many long term West Philly residents didn’t 
 have a reasonable chance to understand what was happening before the fence 
 went up, and neither could you.  As we enter the 2nd season of the closure 
 and fencing of the north part, it is a very relevant time for all to learn 
 or review the history of the past ten years. 
  
 The master plan for “revitalization” of Clark Park was always a master plan 
 for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!  You need to know 
 that nothing about the redesign of Clark Park was continuous from beginning 
 to end (2001-2011), except the demand for secrecy, exclusion of the public, 
 and exclusion of park subcultures!  (Except for replacing trees, it's 
 completely different from the earlier version.)
  
  
  The original Master Plan Steering Committee was hand picked and CLOSED 
 before the news of a scheme to redesign Clark Park was publicly revealed 10 
 years ago!  This committee was filled by local corporations and politicians 
 called stakeholders.  These individuals did not tend to attend the actual 
 meetings, which were closed and secret with no public records.
  
 Organized by UCD/Penn, a few of the leaders from the most dysfunctional 
 civic associations or clubs were also brought on to the secret committee.  
 Specifically, leaders of The Friends of Clark Park (FOCP),   Spruce 
 Hill Civic Association and Regent Square civic association joined. 
  
 For a couple of years previously, I had been harassed by these FOCP leaders 
 because of my role as founder and chief organizer of the Clark Park Music 
 and Arts Community (CPMAC).  At the time, the FOCP had no recognized power 
 and was the laughing stock by department of recreation employees.  They were 
 widely recognized as ridiculous bullies, neighborhood cranks.  (See The 
 Battle of the Bowl, City Paper, 2001)
 http://archives.citypaper.net/articles/102501/news.park.shtml?print=1
  
 Of course, when the secret UCD/Penn committee was revealed ten years ago; I 
 immediately attempted to gain access for ALL park stakeholder groups as well 
 as our own CPMAC. (This was how I became so closely involved and saw the 
 privatization coming).  I knew the goals of the FOCP leadership to control 
 the park, and so I had inside understanding of the serious importance of 
 breaking through the iron wall of the secret committee.  (The Master Plan 
 Steering Committee was organized through U of Penn powerbrokers primarily in 
 the real estate department).
  Throughout the entire process all park user groups were successfully barred 
 from the secret meetings!
   
 Chronology:  First we had this UCD master plan committee.  Their plan was 
 largely rejected by locals.  On the first try, they attempted to use PUBLIC 
 presentations (a regularly used technique that was severely   
 tightened after this huge failure), but the public backlash delayed 
 immediate 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Anthony West]

Richard,

I would have to say Darco's reading is quite skilled. Glenn's 
overwhelming evidence is either imaginary, or self-fabricated. The 
10-year-old article he is fond of citing offers one (1) piece of hard 
evidence that people were being excluded from Clark Park planning: an 
unsupported, quoted assertion by -- none other than himself! That's all 
there's ever been; he has no other evidence to offer.


I note that, since you too know of no instances where anyone has 
actually been excluded from Clark Park or its planning, you have just 
shifted the discussion to Fairmount Park. Here, I have to question your 
statement that control by private parties is increasing in Fairmount 
Park. All of the private facilities there I can think of -- Boathouse 
Row, etc. -- have been in place for a long time. So in fact I might 
point out that what you are worried might happen here, hasn't even been 
happening there.


So this thread is debating an alleged problem which hasn't happened 
here; which hasn't happened there; and which hasn't happened anywhere. 
It is on a level with the problem with Barack Obama's birth certificate.


---Tony West



Darco,

I must agree with Glenn that you have most clearly misinterpreted what 
Glenn wrote and you should read it again more closely.


Although, in fact I might point out, as control by private parties 
increases, particularly when park spaces are leased or sold to private 
parties, it can become a matter of others being excluded.


There are many places in Fairmount Park right now which are private 
property, and where you are quite forbidden to trespass.


Rick Conrad

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[William H. Magill]

On Apr 28, 2011, at 8:04 PM, Glenn wrote:

 Also, can you respond in a few short sentences? I just want to know of one 
 example of someone being excluded from the park.
  
 No, I will not answer your silly question.   There is overwhelming evidence 
 that park stakeholders were barred from the planning committees over the past 
 10 years.
 
 Your question suggests a possible reading comprehension problem.  As in the 
 past, I'd be happy to answer any serious questions.  I respect you and 
 deserve a serious response from you.  All the best.
 
 Sincerely,
 Glenn
This answer says everything there is to say about Glenn.




William H. Magill
Block Captain
4400 Chestnut Street

mag...@mcgillsociety.org
whmag...@gmail.com
 4428 Chestnut Street
 Philadelphia, PA 19104-2914
 (267-402-0529)










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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Richard Conrad]

O.K. let's get real!  Darco represents Glenn as saying soething he did not.  
Darco asks: 
 
do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park?

Glenn did not ever say in his communique that people were excluded from the 
park.

Whether he said something else with which you disagree, Tony... he most 
certainly did not say what Darco said he did!  You ignored that fact in your 
email!  Do you deny that 'mistake' to be the case?!  

As far as people being excluded from planning sessions I do believe Glenn, who 
cited much more than you credited him with.  De Facto exclusion sounds fairly 
patently exhibited.  Your statements regarding Glenn are perhaps even closer to 
libel than Darco's who seems to have misread rather than misrepresented Glenn.  
Whatever your feelings about him are, you both owe him an apology! 

Bill:  There are houses all over the Wissahickon Valley built on (and 
completely surrounded by) formerly public (park) property.  What you are not 
aware of may yet be extant; believe it.  The issue of City sales of Fairmount 
Park property is very current news whether you know it or not.  What you said 
about Glenn was abstruse; and it sounded quite unnecessarily nasty. 

Rick


On Apr 28, 2011, at 9:41 PM, Anthony West wrote:

 Richard,
 
 I would have to say Darco's reading is quite skilled. Glenn's overwhelming 
 evidence is either imaginary, or self-fabricated. The 10-year-old article he 
 is fond of citing offers one (1) piece of hard evidence that people were 
 being excluded from Clark Park planning: an unsupported, quoted assertion 
 by -- none other than himself! That's all there's ever been; he has no other 
 evidence to offer.
 
 I note that, since you too know of no instances where anyone has actually 
 been excluded from Clark Park or its planning, you have just shifted the 
 discussion to Fairmount Park. Here, I have to question your statement that 
 control by private parties is increasing in Fairmount Park. All of the 
 private facilities there I can think of -- Boathouse Row, etc. -- have been 
 in place for a long time. So in fact I might point out that what you are 
 worried might happen here, hasn't even been happening there.
 
 So this thread is debating an alleged problem which hasn't happened here; 
 which hasn't happened there; and which hasn't happened anywhere. It is on a 
 level with the problem with Barack Obama's birth certificate.
 
 ---Tony West
 
 
 Darco,  
 
 I must agree with Glenn that you have most clearly misinterpreted what Glenn 
 wrote and you should read it again more closely.  
 
 Although, in fact I might point out, as control by private parties 
 increases, particularly when park spaces are leased or sold to private 
 parties, it can become a matter of others being excluded.  
 
 There are many places in Fairmount Park right now which are private 
 property, and where you are quite forbidden to trespass.   
 
 Rick Conrad   
 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Anthony West]

Richard,

I quote from Glenn's text, which Darco and I have read quite clearly:

The master plan for 'revitalization' of Clark Park was always a master 
plan for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!


Glenn has, for years, been publishing on this list false allegations 
that various users were *planned to be excluded from the park *by this 
nefarious conspiracy. Since none of them ever were, in fact, excluded 
from the physical park, and there were, in fact, no plans that any users 
should be excluded from the park -- he is now attempting to befuddle you 
-- as well as unsuspecting newcomers -- by pretending some users were 
excluded from *planning for the park. *And he's trying to muddle the two 
together with murky conspiracy-theory language, where what we're talking 
about shifts every time a claim of fact is contested.


Of course, nothing of the sort ever happened. (There wasn't any 
secrecy or any Penn control either.) I looked into these allegations 
very carefully in 2002-03.


Typical Trump talk, in my opinion. But if this is what floats your boat, 
I sure can't stop you. Conspiracy-theory crackpots never run out of gas, 
do they?


--Tony West



On 4/28/2011 11:28 PM, Richard Conrad wrote:
O.K. let's get real!  Darco represents Glenn as saying soething he did 
not.  Darco asks:

do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park?

Glenn did not ever say in his communique that people were excluded 
from the park.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11

[Richard Conrad]

You are reading in.  You don't play fair.  You just can't admit it.  

Glenn does not say as Darco implied that people were excluded from the park 
(and actually people have been - you and everyone else can probably realize 
that people are routinely told to leave the park, for sleeping overnight and 
other reasons).  Maybe Glenn refers to private Clark Park banquets with high 
priced entry fees.  Maybe he refers to private gatherings hosted by Penn where 
the public is excluded.  'Penn Control' is something about which while Glenn 
has held back from giving it ultimate vilification, he warns people to be 
concerned.  'Secrecy' is the most difficult to prove (duh, it's a secret), but 
in any case you ridicule by hyperbole, misrepresent his remarks, and say things 
that are not true.  

You now seem to be practically accusing me of being a Trump conspiracy talk 
supporter.  You clearly haven't read much of what I have written (or you are 
resorting to damaging written public falsification again).  

I am actually a true Balder who believes Donald Trump can't be Pres. because 
he can't prove his hair was born in the U.S.A.  Here is something of mine I 
posted to FB:  

Saying Trump appeals to masochistic dupes with no sense of mathematics, to 
sadistic voyeurs who wish they had balls, or to racist instincts in those of 
lesser intelligence, is all the same... they're just the facts Jack!

Bill Mahr did better:  Bill Maher says, Hey Trump, what's the biggest scam 
ever NOW? I'd say its a guy with 3 bankruptcies telling America how to get its 
financial house in order.

Crackpot.  That is what you say Tony, instead of answering others criticisms! 
 Surely you are big enough to deal with others concerns and not to only resort 
to name calling.  Be fair.

Rick

On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Anthony West wrote:

 Richard,
 
 I quote from Glenn's text, which Darco and I have read quite clearly:
 
 The master plan for 'revitalization' of Clark Park was always a master plan 
 for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!
 
 Glenn has, for years, been publishing on this list false allegations that 
 various users were planned to be excluded from the park by this nefarious 
 conspiracy. Since none of them ever were, in fact, excluded from the physical 
 park, and there were, in fact, no plans that any users should be excluded 
 from the park -- he is now attempting to befuddle you -- as well as 
 unsuspecting newcomers -- by pretending some users were excluded from 
 planning for the park. And he's trying to muddle the two together with murky 
 conspiracy-theory language, where what we're talking about shifts every time 
 a claim of fact is contested.
 
 Of course, nothing of the sort ever happened. (There wasn't any secrecy or 
 any Penn control either.) I looked into these allegations very carefully in 
 2002-03. 
 
 Typical Trump talk, in my opinion. But if this is what floats your boat, I 
 sure can't stop you. Conspiracy-theory crackpots never run out of gas, do 
 they?
 
 --Tony West
 
 
 
 On 4/28/2011 11:28 PM, Richard Conrad wrote:
 
 O.K. let's get real!  Darco represents Glenn as saying something he did not. 
  Darco asks: 
  
 do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park?
 
 Glenn did not ever say in his communique that people were excluded from the 
 park.
 

Re: [UC] Clark Park

[Glenn moyer]

Tim,

Closing the park for two seasons isan important and well studiedgentrificationstrategy for public spaces. This is a strategy designed to eliminateregular locals likethe drum circle, volleyball, capture the flag, chess, dark skinned people, etc. After two seasons, the university/corporations hope that the undesireables have moved elsewhere. 

The corporations/univeristywould prefer to avoid the masiive arrests for PR spin purposes. A new set of permit regulations will be carefully crafted for any locals who might return. They will be arrested immediately like the poor people and homelesswere a year before the closure.

Please remember that absolutely no information from the corporate drones, FOCP, can be trusted. They told people that all of this was a little maintenance to help the trees-haha.

All the best,
Glenn



-Original Message- From: tim dunn Sent: Mar 13, 2011 11:19 PM To: list serv Subject: [UC] Clark Park 



Spring is in the air, and me and some friends are wondering when Clark Park is scheduled to re-open. Does anyone know...?

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

Re: [UC] Clark Park

[Brian Siano]

Latest new we have is early June.

http://www.friendsofclarkpark.org

On 3/13/11, tim dunn kafkaatka...@yahoo.com wrote:
 Spring is in the air, and me and some friends are wondering when Clark Park
 is scheduled to re-open. Does anyone know...?





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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

more:

http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/article/map-shows-race-division-philadelphia


Map shows race division in Philadelphia
New map detailing racial breakdown shows de facto segregation, even in 
University City
Monday, October 4, 2010
by MK Kleva


excerpt:


While the Civil Rights Act abolished segregation 46 years
ago, a new map of Philadelphia serves as a reminder that
racial separation still exists around the city, even near
Penn’s campus.

The map, created by Eric Fischer on photo-sharing
site Flickr.com, uses Census 2000 data to demonstrate the
racial makeup of the city. The map shows most
neighborhoods are dominated by a single racial group.

...

Rory Kramer, a sixth-year sociology doctoral student,
researches segregation patterns in Philadelphia. “Penn
has successfully gentrified westward,” he said, with more
white and fewer black individuals living in the area.

He said that while more white people now live around
Penn, it is not necessarily indicative of integration.
For the newcomers, it is a pleasant place to live because
there are more stores and activities for them, he said.
However, for the small number of black West
Philadelphians still living near Penn, friends and
neighbors have moved away along with their businesses and
neighborhood dynamic.

Charles attributed some of this change to the University
encouraging faculty and staff to live closer to campus in
University City and Spruce Hill. Nevertheless, she said
diversity in University City is minimal in relation to
the predominantly black population in West Philadelphia.






UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN wrote:

thanks, darco



Lalevic, Darco wrote:

Sure, as Glenn points out, numerous attempts to paint the
neighborhood as a wild, out of control neighborhood that
UCD and associated entities have now made safe.

I disagree with UCD taking on an enforcement roll of any
kind. I disagree with the entire Clark Park
revitalization plan. I think it's wasteful at the least,
and at worse, part of an effort to clean up the park to
make it more appealing to the gentrification of the
neighborhood and push certain people out. The structure
of the UCD is designed to advocate for the corporate
entities (and while, yes, it's their money mostly, the
net effect is the general public is left out of
decisions).


-Original Message- From:
owner-univc...@list.purple.com
[mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On Behalf Of
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 10:07
AM To: univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] Clark
Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

Lalevic, Darco wrote:

I too am often offended by the bias and misinformation
that is often propagated as marketing for University
City.



can you cite examples of this?





Sure, I disagree with UCD and FOCP on many issues,



examples?





The fact is, by not engaging the argument in a logical,
academic way, you've pushed the relevance of your
argument to the wayside.



..
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.

RE: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Lalevic, Darco]

Tony,

That's wonderful to hear - and I would assume the end result is a better park 
that gets more use. I disagree more so with the immense public expenditure on a 
park that I, at least, view as pretty darn nice, considering the state of most 
of this city. But yes, you are correct, if the money is going to get spent 
anyway, it's up to the neighborhood to get what it can. And no, the 
neighborhood shouldn't avoid solely out of fear of gentrification, but should 
be aware that there are people out there (in general) who intentionally or not 
push for changes.

Darco

-Original Message-
From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 3:21 PM
To: UnivCity listserv
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

  A half-hour ago, on a cool, gray fall afternoon, I observed 15 inner-city 
kids playing on the new basketball court, 12 kids playing on the new older-kids 
playground, 6 kids playing on the new totlot -- all fruits of the Clark Park 
Revitalization Plan. Different people hold different priorities, but in 
general, I don't think it's wasteful to direct a little public investment 
toward inner-city kids every 40 years or so.

I never ask strange children if they are gentry or not, but I also saw no 
evidence today that certain people have, in fact, been pushed out of the park, 
just because it's been improved. My friends in the Woodland Avenue Reunion like 
the way the park has been upgraded. A better park attracts people from all over 
West Philadelphia, every day.

Completely ungentrified West Philadelphia neighborhoods, like those around 
Clara Muhammad Park and Carroll Park, have also lobbied successfully for public 
investments in these public spaces in recent years. Should our neighborhood 
avoid doing likewise, solely out of fear of committing gentrification?

-- Tony West


 Lalevic, Darco wrote:
 I disagree with the entire Clark Park revitalization plan. I think 
 it's wasteful at the least, and at worse, part of an effort to clean 
 up the park to make it more appealing to the gentrification of the 
 neighborhood and push certain people out.



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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

thanks, darco



Lalevic, Darco wrote:

Sure, as Glenn points out, numerous attempts to paint the
neighborhood as a wild, out of control neighborhood that
UCD and associated entities have now made safe.

I disagree with UCD taking on an enforcement roll of any
kind. I disagree with the entire Clark Park
revitalization plan. I think it's wasteful at the least,
and at worse, part of an effort to clean up the park to
make it more appealing to the gentrification of the
neighborhood and push certain people out. The structure
of the UCD is designed to advocate for the corporate
entities (and while, yes, it's their money mostly, the
net effect is the general public is left out of
decisions).


-Original Message- From:
owner-univc...@list.purple.com
[mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On Behalf Of
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 10:07
AM To: univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] Clark
Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

Lalevic, Darco wrote:

I too am often offended by the bias and misinformation
that is often propagated as marketing for University
City.



can you cite examples of this?





Sure, I disagree with UCD and FOCP on many issues,



examples?





The fact is, by not engaging the argument in a logical,
academic way, you've pushed the relevance of your
argument to the wayside.



..
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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Anthony West]

 A half-hour ago, on a cool, gray fall afternoon, I observed 15 
inner-city kids playing on the new basketball court, 12 kids playing on 
the new older-kids playground, 6 kids playing on the new totlot -- all 
fruits of the Clark Park Revitalization Plan. Different people hold 
different priorities, but in general, I don't think it's wasteful to 
direct a little public investment toward inner-city kids every 40 years 
or so.


I never ask strange children if they are gentry or not, but I also saw 
no evidence today that certain people have, in fact, been pushed out of 
the park, just because it's been improved. My friends in the Woodland 
Avenue Reunion like the way the park has been upgraded. A better park 
attracts people from all over West Philadelphia, every day.


Completely ungentrified West Philadelphia neighborhoods, like those 
around Clara Muhammad Park and Carroll Park, have also lobbied 
successfully for public investments in these public spaces in recent 
years. Should our neighborhood avoid doing likewise, solely out of fear 
of committing gentrification?


-- Tony West



Lalevic, Darco wrote:

I disagree with the entire Clark Park
revitalization plan. I think it's wasteful at the least,
and at worse, part of an effort to clean up the park to
make it more appealing to the gentrification of the
neighborhood and push certain people out.





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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Lalevic, Darco wrote:
I too am 
often offended by the bias and misinformation that is often propagated 
as marketing for “University City”.



can you cite examples of this?





Sure, I disagree with UCD and FOCP on many issues,



examples?









The fact is, by not engaging the argument in a 
logical, academic way, you’ve pushed the relevance of your argument to 
the wayside.



..
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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR - and your rights are?

[Glenn]

Craig,

You will get a good deal of pleasure from this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmByfTKKUV4NR=1feature=fvwp




On 9/24/2010 5:34 PM, craigso...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 9/24/2010 12:37:39 Eastern Daylight Time, 
glen...@earthlink.net writes:


... speak up against ...the forces ... and strip them of their rights 

In the end you know what we do with guys like you, who know their 
rights, and refuse to accept they're wrongs?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-z44dVBU64
Is that a John Deere parked in the rear of your Baltimore Ave 
gentleman's ranchette?


Ciao,
Craig



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3156 - Release Date: 09/24/10 
02:34:00

   

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Kathleen Turner]

Does comparison to the Holocaust invoke Godwin's Law, and if so, does that
mean that Glenn is forever barred from writing further messages on this
topic?

Kathleen

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM, craigso...@aol.com wrote:


  “They came first for the Communists,
 and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

 Then they came for the trade unionists,
 and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

 Then they came for the Jews,
 and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.



  And then we came for Glenn,
 and everyone cheered up.

 Ciao,

 Craig



  *From:* owner-univc...@list.purple.com [
 mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com owner-univc...@list.purple.com?] *On
 Behalf Of *Glenn
 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:18 AM
 *To:* UnivCity@list.purple.com
 *Subject:* [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

 Citizens,
  Here is the UC Review coverage of the Clark park closure.  Like always,
 the local residents are supposed to feel stupid while they are wondering how
 they missed “nearly five years of planning and nearly countless public
 meetings geared toward receiving community feedback on revitalizing Park
 A…  (UC Review)


 http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no


 snip

  Today, it is the park users whose culture and rights are being destroyed.
 I copied this from the Holocaust memorial in downtown Boston for the silent
 ones to consider:

 “They came first for the Communists,
 and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

 Then they came for the trade unionists,
 and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

 Then they came for the Jews,
 and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

 Then they came for me
 and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

 Pastor Martin Neimoller

  =

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Cindy Miller]

No, but according to Wikipedia, it means that Glenn has lost and the  
discussion is now over.




-cm




On Sep 24, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Kathleen Turner wrote:

Does comparison to the Holocaust invoke Godwin's Law, and if so,  
does that mean that Glenn is forever barred from writing further  
messages on this topic?


Kathleen

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM, craigso...@aol.com wrote:

“They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.


And then we came for Glenn,
and everyone cheered up.

Ciao,

Craig



From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com 
] On Behalf Of Glenn

Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:18 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

Citizens,
 Here is the UC Review coverage of the Clark park closure.  Like  
always, the local residents are supposed to feel stupid while they  
are wondering how they missed “nearly five years of planning and  
nearly countless public meetings geared toward receiving community  
feedback on revitalizing Park A…  (UC Review)


http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no


snip

 Today, it is the park users whose culture and rights are being  
destroyed.  I copied this from the Holocaust memorial in downtown  
Boston for the silent ones to consider:


“They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

Pastor Martin Neimoller

=

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

but then soon after glenn invoked chaucer, and


Right so as bees out swarmen from an hyve,
Out of the develes ers ther gonne dryve
Twenty thousand freres on a route,
And thurghout helle swarmed al aboute,
And comen agayn as faste as they may gon,
And in his ers they crepten everychon.
He clapte his tayl agayn and lay ful stille.


:-)



Cindy Miller wrote:
No, but according to Wikipedia, it means that Glenn has lost and the 
discussion is now over.


-cm




On Sep 24, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Kathleen Turner wrote:

Does comparison to the Holocaust invoke Godwin's Law, and if so, does 
that mean that Glenn is forever barred from writing further messages 
on this topic?


Kathleen

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM, craigso...@aol.com 
mailto:craigso...@aol.com wrote:



“They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.



And then we came for Glenn,
and everyone cheered up.
 
Ciao,
 
Craig







































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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Glenn]

Darco,

I would normally wish to ignore the ambiguous injury you suffered in 
your one line tweet.  These tweets solely to intimidate speakers or 
chill speech of others should not ordinarily receive a serious response.



But the code of silence which you invoke is so severely dangerous that I 
must respond publicly!


 Many of us, who have learned from the WW II holocaust and all the 
other holocausts, also stand firmly behind the knowledge that the 
lessons from the history must never be forgotten or silenced. Otherwise, 
they will always repeat.


A million people died in the Iran Iraq war when we armed Saddam Hussein 
to kill Persians.  How many died in Vietnam and Cambodia as they were 
called gooks?  How many died in Iraq from US sanctions?  An estimated 
million more Iraqis died in the recent war and there are millions of 
refugees destabilizing the entire region.  Those dead people were called 
ragheads in military recruitment video games.   This blood offends me 
and those dead millions can't tell their stories!



Darco, this blood and much more has been spilled since 1945.  I won't be 
silenced while the main cause this blood was spilled is because too much 
of middle class America has indeed forgotten the reasons why Neimoller's 
quote is carved in granite on holocaust memorials around the world.I 
think those words should be studied and discussed by every high school 
student in America. (I copied the famous quote by hand because I wanted 
it burned into my mind.) Those who wish to mystify the holocausts and 
deny the study of these frighten me!



A main lesson of that quote has to do with the inevitable course history 
will take when good people stay silent when the other is first defined 
and dehumanized.



For many years, the people from Clark Park and West Philly have been 
actively portrayed as criminals, prostitutes, gangs, etc. My inner city 
neighbors and poor people have similarly been categorized and caged 
afterward.  Less than a year ago, a UCD executive was quoted in a city 
wide paper claiming that people did not go West of 43rd St before the 
UCD takeover.  I was OFFENDED!


To those of us who understand the messages in Neimoller's words, this 
intensive dehumanizing propaganda campaign against my neighbors has been 
alarming.  This process that WE MUST NEVER FORGET is happening right 
here, RIGHT NOW!



The code of silence required to avoid offending you is extremely 
dangerous.  I also want people to see the body bags and feel 
uncomfortable with the global horror caused because they refuse to speak 
up against racism and all the forces to define others and strip them 
of their rights and lives.  I don't give a damn who is offended or 
uncomfortable.


Now Darco, I can tell you to take your silly ambiguous tweet and stuff it.

Sincerely,
Glenn

For emphasis:

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.


Pastor Martin Neimoller





On 9/23/2010 2:14 PM, Lalevic, Darco wrote:


Glenn,

While I appreciate your futile intentions to wrest control of Clark 
Park from the UCD/Penn/FOCP/everyone-else conspiracy, I find it 
extremely offensive that you use a Holocaust reference for effect.


Darco

*From:* owner-univc...@list.purple.com 
[mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] *On Behalf Of *Glenn

*Sent:* Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:18 AM
*To:* UnivCity@list.purple.com
*Subject:* [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

Citizens,

 Here is the UC Review coverage of the Clark park closure.  Like 
always, the local residents are supposed to feel stupid while they are 
wondering how they missed nearly five years of planning and nearly 
countless public meetings geared toward receiving community feedback 
on revitalizing Park A...  (UC Review)


http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no 
http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no


If you looked closely at the announcements of Friends of Clark Park 
meetings over the past few years, a few mentioned updates about 
maintenance.  Almost no one from the community, other than the 
anointed FOCP leaders themselves, bore the pain of these gatherings as 
I did.


Fact:  There was no portion at FOCP board meetings that was ever 
geared toward receiving PUBLIC feedback about Penn's plan to redesign 
the park!


Eyewitness account:  A few minutes (4 or 5) were left at the end of 
each show, in case anyone wanted to thank and applaud the FOCP 
leaders.  For three consecutive years, I attempted to make a one 
minute statement to voice opposition to the closed, 

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Glenn]

Yes, you understand!

On 9/24/2010 8:33 AM, Cindy Miller wrote:
No, but according to Wikipedia, it means that Glenn has lost and the 
discussion is now over.




-cm




On Sep 24, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Kathleen Turner wrote:

Does comparison to the Holocaust invoke Godwin's Law, and if so, does 
that mean that Glenn is forever barred from writing further messages 
on this topic?


Kathleen

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM, craigso...@aol.com 
mailto:craigso...@aol.com wrote:



They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.



And then we came for Glenn,
and everyone cheered up.
Ciao,
Craig


*From:* owner-univc...@list.purple.com
mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com
[mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com
mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com?] *On Behalf Of *Glenn
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:18 AM
*To:* UnivCity@list.purple.com mailto:UnivCity@list.purple.com
*Subject:* [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR
Citizens,
 Here is the UC Review coverage of the Clark park closure.  Like
always, the local residents are supposed to feel stupid while
they are wondering how they missed nearly five years of planning
and nearly countless public meetings geared toward receiving
community feedback on revitalizing Park A...  (UC Review)

http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no

http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no
snip
 Today, it is the park users whose culture and rights are being
destroyed.  I copied this from the Holocaust memorial in downtown
Boston for the silent ones to consider:
They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Pastor Martin Neimoller
=






No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.856 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3155 - Release Date: 09/23/10 
14:34:00

   

RE: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Lalevic, Darco]

Bullshit.

I understand all too well the rise of corporatism, the failings of society, the 
consequences of war, hate, racism, and distrust. I have experienced it and seen 
it first hand.

I also don't want you to speak for me. I can do it myself. I was born in this 
neighborhood and have lived here almost all of my life. I too am often offended 
by the bias and misinformation that is often propagated as marketing for 
University City. As for happening right here, right now I can tell you it's 
been happening right here for as long as I can remember, and I'm pretty sure 
for longer than that.

What I'm offended by is that you choose Clark Park as the focal representation 
of societal horrors. Sure, I disagree with UCD and FOCP on many issues, but I'm 
willing to bet after they blow all that money, the park will be used by the 
same people as it is now. Yes, I disagree with (what I perceive as) the push to 
disenfranchise certain people from the park (I'm not accusing anyone directly 
of doing so, I'm reflecting on the selective enforcement of what I consider 
stupid laws). And yes, what is happening is representative of our society in 
general.

But to equate what is happening with Clark Park in any way with the death of 
millions is disrespectful. Additionally, it puts your argument into the 
irrational category for most people. Your yelling that the world is going to 
end, rather than providing detailed facts to your argument, inevitably causes 
fewer people to become involved. As you yourself have pointed out, how many 
others have publicly fought against the Clark Park changes? The fact is, by not 
engaging the argument in a logical, academic way, you've pushed the relevance 
of your argument to the wayside.

And really, 5 years of planning? I remember seeing a plan for revitalizing 
Clark Park 10 years ago! If someone didn't know this was coming then they 
clearly have not been paying attention.

Darco

PS: I have one for you:
A shepherd-boy, who watched a flock of sheep near a village, brought out the 
villagers three or four times by crying out, Wolf! Wolf! and when his 
neighbors came to help him, laughed at them for their pains. The Wolf, however, 
did truly come at last. The Shepherd-boy, now really alarmed, shouted in an 
agony of terror: Pray, do come and help me; the Wolf is killing the sheep; 
but no one paid any heed to his cries, nor rendered any assistance. The Wolf, 
having no cause of fear, at his leisure lacerated or destroyed the whole 
flock. - Aesop


From: Glenn [mailto:glen...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 12:36 PM
To: Lalevic, Darco
Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

Darco,

I would normally wish to ignore the ambiguous injury you suffered in your one 
line tweet.  These tweets solely to intimidate speakers or chill speech of 
others should not ordinarily receive a serious response.


But the code of silence which you invoke is so severely dangerous that I must 
respond publicly!

 Many of us, who have learned from the WW II holocaust and all the other 
holocausts, also stand firmly behind the knowledge that the lessons from the 
history must never be forgotten or silenced. Otherwise, they will always repeat.

A million people died in the Iran Iraq war when we armed Saddam Hussein to kill 
Persians.  How many died in Vietnam and Cambodia as they were called gooks?  
How many died in Iraq from US sanctions?  An estimated million more Iraqis died 
in the recent war and there are millions of refugees destabilizing the entire 
region.  Those dead people were called ragheads in military recruitment video 
games.   This blood offends me and those dead millions can't tell their stories!


Darco, this blood and much more has been spilled since 1945.  I won't be 
silenced while the main cause this blood was spilled is because too much of 
middle class America has indeed forgotten the reasons why Neimoller's quote is 
carved in granite on holocaust memorials around the world.I think those 
words should be studied and discussed by every high school student in America. 
(I copied the famous quote by hand because I wanted it burned into my mind.) 
Those who wish to mystify the holocausts and deny the study of these frighten 
me!


A main lesson of that quote has to do with the inevitable course history will 
take when good people stay silent when the other is first defined and 
dehumanized.


For many years, the people from Clark Park and West Philly have been actively 
portrayed as criminals, prostitutes, gangs, etc. My inner city neighbors and 
poor people have similarly been categorized and caged afterward.  Less than a 
year ago, a UCD executive was quoted in a city wide paper claiming that 
people did not go West of 43rd St before the UCD takeover.  I was OFFENDED!

To those of us who understand the messages in Neimoller's words, this intensive 
dehumanizing propaganda campaign against my neighbors has

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR - and your rights are?

[Craigsolve]

In a message dated 9/24/2010 12:37:39 Eastern Daylight Time,  
glen...@earthlink.net writes:

... speak up against ...the forces ... and strip them of their  rights 
In the end you know what we do with guys like you, who know their rights,  
and refuse to accept they're wrongs?
 
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-z44dVBU64_ 
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-z44dVBU64) 
 
Is that a John Deere parked in the rear of your Baltimore Ave gentleman's  
ranchette?

Ciao,
 
Craig

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Wilma de Soto]

You HAVE?


On 9/24/10 3:04 PM, Lalevic, Darco lale...@wharton.upenn.edu wrote:

 Bullshit.
  
 I understand all too well the rise of corporatism, the failings of society,
 the consequences of war, hate, racism, and distrust. I have experienced it and
 seen it first hand.
  
 I also don¹t want you to speak for me. I can do it myself. I was born in this
 neighborhood and have lived here almost all of my life. I too am often
 offended by the bias and misinformation that is often propagated as marketing
 for ³University City². As for happening ³right here, right now² I can tell you
 it¹s been happening ³right here² for as long as I can remember, and I¹m pretty
 sure for longer than that.
  
 What I¹m offended by is that you choose Clark Park as the focal representation
 of societal horrors. Sure, I disagree with UCD and FOCP on many issues, but
 I¹m willing to bet after they blow all that money, the park will be used by
 the same people as it is now. Yes, I disagree with (what I perceive as) the
 push to disenfranchise certain people from the park (I¹m not accusing anyone
 directly of doing so, I¹m reflecting on the selective enforcement of what I
 consider stupid laws). And yes, what is happening is representative of our
 society in general.
  
 But to equate what is happening with Clark Park in any way with the death of
 millions is disrespectful. Additionally, it puts your argument into the
 irrational category for most people. Your yelling that the world is going to
 end, rather than providing detailed facts to your argument, inevitably causes
 fewer people to become involved. As you yourself have pointed out, how many
 others have publicly fought against the Clark Park changes? The fact is, by
 not engaging the argument in a logical, academic way, you¹ve pushed the
 relevance of your argument to the wayside.
  
 And really, 5 years of planning? I remember seeing a plan for ³revitalizing²
 Clark Park 10 years ago! If someone didn¹t know this was coming then they
 clearly have not been paying attention.
  
 Darco
  
 PS: I have one for you:
 ³A shepherd-boy, who watched a flock of sheep near a village, brought out the
 villagers three or four times by crying out, Wolf! Wolf! and when his
 neighbors came to help him, laughed at them for their pains. The Wolf,
 however, did truly come at last. The Shepherd-boy, now really alarmed, shouted
 in an agony of terror: Pray, do come and help me; the Wolf is killing the
 sheep; but no one paid any heed to his cries, nor rendered any assistance.
 The Wolf, having no cause of fear, at his leisure lacerated or destroyed the
 whole flock.² ­ Aesop
  
  
 
 From: Glenn [mailto:glen...@earthlink.net]
 Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 12:36 PM
 To: Lalevic, Darco
 Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
 Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR
  
 Darco,
 
 I would normally wish to ignore the ambiguous injury you suffered in your one
 line tweet.  These tweets solely to intimidate speakers or chill speech of
 others should not ordinarily receive a serious response.
 
 
 But the code of silence which you invoke is so severely dangerous that I must
 respond publicly!
 
  Many of us, who have learned from the WW II holocaust and all the other
 holocausts, also stand firmly behind the knowledge that the lessons from the
 history must never be forgotten or silenced. Otherwise, they will always
 repeat.
 
 A million people died in the Iran Iraq war when we armed Saddam Hussein to
 kill Persians.  How many died in Vietnam and Cambodia as they were called
 gooks?  How many died in Iraq from US sanctions?  An estimated million more
 Iraqis died in the recent war and there are millions of refugees destabilizing
 the entire region.  Those dead people were called ragheads in military
 recruitment video games.   This blood offends me and those dead millions can't
 tell their stories!
 
 
 Darco, this blood and much more has been spilled since 1945.  I won't be
 silenced while the main cause this blood was spilled is because too much of
 middle class America has indeed forgotten the reasons why Neimoller's quote is
 carved in granite on holocaust memorials around the world.I think those
 words should be studied and discussed by every high school student in America.
 (I copied the famous quote by hand because I wanted it burned into my mind.)
 Those who wish to mystify the holocausts and deny the study of these frighten
 me! 
 
 
 A main lesson of that quote has to do with the inevitable course history will
 take when good people stay silent when the other is first defined and
 dehumanized.
 
 
 For many years, the people from Clark Park and West Philly have been actively
 portrayed as criminals, prostitutes, gangs, etc. My inner city neighbors and
 poor people have similarly been categorized and caged afterward.  Less than a
 year ago, a UCD executive was quoted in a city wide paper claiming that
 people did not go West of 43rd St before the UCD takeover.  I

RE: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[Lalevic, Darco]

Glenn,

While I appreciate your futile intentions to wrest control of Clark Park from 
the UCD/Penn/FOCP/everyone-else conspiracy, I find it extremely offensive that 
you use a Holocaust reference for effect.

Darco


From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:18 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

Citizens,
 Here is the UC Review coverage of the Clark park closure.  Like always, the 
local residents are supposed to feel stupid while they are wondering how they 
missed nearly five years of planning and nearly countless public meetings 
geared toward receiving community feedback on revitalizing Park A...  (UC 
Review)

http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no


If you looked closely at the announcements of Friends of Clark Park meetings 
over the past few years, a few mentioned updates about maintenance.  Almost 
no one from the community, other than the anointed FOCP leaders themselves, 
bore the pain of these gatherings as I did.


Fact:  There was no portion at FOCP board meetings that was ever geared toward 
receiving PUBLIC feedback about Penn's plan to redesign the park!


Eyewitness account:  A few minutes (4 or 5) were left at the end of each show, 
in case anyone wanted to thank and applaud the FOCP leaders.  For three 
consecutive years, I attempted to make a one minute statement to voice 
opposition to the closed, secretive and exclusive process which was driving 
Penn's redesign.  Each time I was silenced (Snyder, Snyder, Melmen)!  That is 
what FOCP claims were countless public meetings for feedback.


As indicated in the UCR article, the other public process was to find out 
about Siano and West frightening people PRIVATELY at the farmer's market.  
Everyone is to believe that while Siano and West demanded 20 dollars from 
people with false promises of inclusion, that citizens had a legitimate process 
for providing feedback to the closed and secret Clark Park Partnership.  It's 
as silly and dishonest as melani's private in-box survey for BID supporters.  
(I wish more people understood the very basic principles involved!)

It looks like the big lie has now become part of the history of West 
Philadelphia as advanced by UCD.

Reality:  The years between the rejection of Penn's plan to redesign Clark Park 
as well as these FOCP updates were always designed to keep the public 
confused and excluded from the UNPOPULAR plan.  They kept saying the community 
wants this destruction and kept telling the public that there were public 
meetings.  They never allowed park user groups to participate or observe the 
planning meetings since Penn first hand picked the master plan steering 
committee.  Only FOCP leaders were allowed and all others were banned.

 When Aaron told the reporter that 100 people, he knew, were surprised by the 
slaughter of trees, we are all supposed to believe that they just didn't pay 
enough attention while the FOCP patiently begged for community feedback in 
public meetings!  Are the people going to stay silent against this lie?

Wake up:  The three stooges, West, Siano, and Chance, helped Penn privatize 
Clark Park and give absolute control of Clark Park to UCD, masked as the closed 
 Clark Park Partnership.  It wasn't public feedback meetings that everyone 
missed.  It was the loss of our rights, as local residents and as citizens, 
that we failed to see and stand up against with these deceptions!

 Today, it is the park users whose culture and rights are being destroyed.  I 
copied this from the Holocaust memorial in downtown Boston for the silent ones 
to consider:

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Pastor Martin Neimoller

Re: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

[craigsolve]

“They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.




And then we came for Glenn,
and everyone cheered up.

Ciao,

Craig




 

From: owner-univc...@list.purple.com [mailto:owner-univc...@list.purple.com] On 
Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:18 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Clark Park: Power and secrecy was the goal, UCR

 
Citizens,
 Here is the UC Review coverage of the Clark park closure.  Like always, the 
local residents are supposed to feel stupid while they are wondering how they 
missed “nearly five years of planning and nearly countless public meetings 
geared toward receiving community feedback on revitalizing Park A…  (UC 
Review)
 
http://ucreview.com/tree-removal-in-clark-park-a-elicits-surprise-from-some-local-residents-p2341-1.htm?twindow=defaultsmenu=1mad=no
 
 
snip
 
 Today, it is the park users whose culture and rights are being destroyed.  I 
copied this from the Holocaust memorial in downtown Boston for the silent ones 
to consider:  
 
“They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

Pastor Martin Neimoller
 
= 

Re: [UC] Clark Park reconstruction: start date is week of Aug 9!

[Anthony West]

I feel a growing interest in what comes next.

The 2001 Revitalization Master Plan for Clark Park spelled out millions 
of dollars in longterm improvements (a timeframe looking ahead to 2050), 
which should be addressed piecemeal, as funds become available. Several 
longstanding sore spots -- the tot lot, the older playground and the 
basketball court -- have now been remediated, to universal satisfaction.


After the North Park reconstruction gets digested (it'll take a couple 
of years to see how it needs to be finished off), what is the next 
priority? I think it should be in the Middle and South Park. Two 
suggestions:


(1) Restoring grass to the Bowl: can it be done, and what will it take? 
Drainage and compaction issues are complex. Several agents who thought 
they could just sow a few grand worth of seed there and get great 
results have tried, and failed. Serious (six-figure) reconstruction may 
be needed. Professional study is required.


(2) Creating a southern plaza out of the current Kingsessing parking 
lot. Surely this isn't the best use of scarce park space! But delicate, 
long-term economic and political interests are involved. This likely is 
a 10-year project.


Friends of Clark Park will be soliciting community input on this 
question in the months to come.


-- Tony West



The Friends of Clark Park is pleased to announce that we have definite
start-dates for our long-awaited reconstruction of Park A (the section
between Baltimore and Chester). The project will commence during the
week of August 9th, 2010.

We had hoped to have the project start after Labor Day, However, the
city's contractor has other projects after ours, and he wants to get a
good, early start. So, the project start date's been moved up a month.
Needless to say, we'll be working hard to get the word out to
everyone.

As we understand it, the entire Park A section will be roped off, and
will be closed for use until the project's done, which should be by
mid-November. We have been coordinating with the planners of the
major, planned events (the Farmer's Market, the Uhuru flea markets) to
relocate to Park B. The less formal activities-- chess playing, drum
circle, volleyball-- should have no problems relocating to other areas
of the park for the duration.

This project has been in the works for a long time, and we are
extremely happy that the perfect storm of planning and funding has
happened. We are grateful for the support we've received from the
community, as well as the efforts provided by UC Green, the
Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, the HMS School, the University
City District, the Department of Recreation, and the State of
Pennsylvania, as well as the work of many FOCP members past and
present.

Eventually, we'll have more information out to the public via our
website and other media. In the meantime, get ready for a long-awaited
renovation for Clark Park.

Brian Siano
Vice-President
Friends of Clark Park
http://www.clarkpark.info
   



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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Weed killer question

[Brian Siano]

The landscapers don't use herbicides on Clark Park. They pull weeds by hand.

On 7/9/10, Glenn moyer glen...@earthlink.net wrote:

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/08/weighing-safety-of-weed-k_n_639120.html

 Did anyone ever uncover the name of the particular safe herbicides dumped
 in Clark Park since UCD has controlled the park?

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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Weed killer question

[Glenn]

Thanks Brian.

How did they kill dandelions, clover, crab grass, and all the broad leaf 
grasses over the past years?  Several years ago, Lew was told the stuff 
was safe enough to drink when he asked the guy spraying the stuff , but 
no one has ever named the mysterious liquid.


 I'd ask myself, but the Clark Park Partnership is completely closed to 
all members of the public.   And UCD doesn't tell the truth about this 
stuff.


Some of our neighbors may wish to look at the EPA records to better 
understand how little independent study was conducted on the safety of 
the individual chemicals they were secretly exposed to.  I think the 
toxicity to frogs and the disregard for the environment is abundantly 
clear to most concerned neighbors.


Thanks again,
Glenn

On 7/10/2010 3:31 PM, Brian Siano wrote:

The landscapers don't use herbicides on Clark Park. They pull weeds by hand.

On 7/9/10, Glenn moyerglen...@earthlink.net  wrote:
   

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/08/weighing-safety-of-weed-k_n_639120.html

Did anyone ever uncover the name of the particular safe herbicides dumped
in Clark Park since UCD has controlled the park?
 


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.



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2993 - Release Date: 07/10/10 
02:36:00

   

Re: [UC] Clark Park is for sale

[Glenn moyer]

Title: Re: [UC] Clark Park is for sale


West says "How could FoCP possibly "sell advertising rights in Clark Park"?"

"Ok. So, just to be clear, FOCP is not selling advertising rights in Clark Park? I don’t have to worry about billboards for payday lenders in the Park?Kimm"

Kimm,

This street art spin was never reported. This bench thing is from one of the car share companies, period. With this West spin, billboards will also be called street art by dishonest characters. Was this advertising precedent made public? Or was this decided unilaterally by FOCP leaders behind closed doors?

Penn has addicted these characters targeting their vanity, quest for personal power, and wish for a legacy. They tried this stuff on me repeatedly when they wanted me to be their pawn to support a large permanent performance stage erected in the bowl. (Note: The organization I founded had me coordinating more yearly volunteers for the park than the entire membership of the FOCP. When I refused to be a pawn, Penn, FOCP/SHCA worked hard to destroy my influence and role while silencing my reports to the community with some of the ugliest tactics that are hard for people to believe! For example, FOCP went after my career in health care research by attacking my character in the City Paper, "Battle for the Bowl!")

The neo colonialist strategies for the use of groups, like the leaders of FOCP, are documented. Penn completely understands that these leaders do not represent the members of their association nor the community. The leaders of these groups were targeted because of their reputation as the organized cranky fringe element in the community. (I will forward complete documentation of Penn’s specific neo-colonialist strategy at another time) The big money changesFOCP wants for Clark Park have absolutely nothing to do with the needs or desires arising from the community. 

Those of us identified as “key persons” involved with the culture of Clark Park informed Penn long ago that the general design of Clark Park was very good, that the park was well loved, and safe during normal operating hours. Many neighbors will remember that FOCP and SHCA leaders demanded, with dishonest and exclusionary tactics, Penn’s original plan to completely uproot the entire park and completely redesign it. Community residents overwhelmingly hated this plan and voiced their objections while all of us were completely excluded from the handpicked secret planning committee. 

Some of the subsequent reforms demanded by FOCP members and ignored by their leaders were a direct result of the contempt shown by FOCP leaders in that earlier attempt!

Big money and power were the drugs dangled before these insular groups. Like with other addicted people, these “leaders” lose control over their cravings and will rob when necessary to obtain the drug. I don’t want to get into the profile of these life long civic association leaders, but I will assert that it is well understood by the Penn power brokers.

FOCP leaders want control of the big money and apparently recently realized that they were merely instruments for the Penn agenda as some of us have been pointing out for years. But the addiction to control of big money changes continues within them. 

Please don’t believe that the precedent set for this car share advertisement is some isolated “street art.” FOCP leaders are making this huge case that they are desperate for money to complete the changes they wish to secretly control. This is fact! I don’t believe that these addicted people will hesitate to continue to raise “donations” with more of these “street art” projects. Their quest for power, control, and the legacy of new construction and changes is much too strong in them. The people of this community are invisible and expendable to these addicts.

Sorry for the length but these important matters are silenced at public forums under their control.

Sincerely,
Glenn


-Original Message- From: Kimm Tynan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Oct 16, 2008 11:27 PM To: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, UnivCity listserv <UNIVCITY@LIST.PURPLE.COM>Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park is for sale On 10/16/08 11:00 PM, "Anthony West" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It isn't so, Kimm. Glenn is talking about a street-art installation left over from a citywide project, which cut up a car into two pieces, that can be used as a bench. These were originally set up in Center City on-street parking spaces, to demonstrate the potential of car-free urban public spaces. It'll be installed in the new, somewhat empty and featureless plaza at the southern tip of Clark Park, at Woodland Ave.-- Tony West On 10/16/08 1:54 PM, "Glenn moyer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was revealed last night that FOCP will start selling advertising rights in Clark Park. So far, a bench in the shape of one of the car share companies is planned. OK – someone – please say it ain’t so? Kimm --

Re: [UC] Clark Park is for sale

[Kimm Tynan]

On 10/16/08 1:54 PM, Glenn moyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 It was revealed last night that FOCP will start selling advertising rights in
 Clark Park.  So far, a bench in the shape of one of the car share companies is
 planned.

OK ­ someone ­ please say it ain¹t so?

Kimm

Re: [UC] Clark Park is for sale

[Anthony West]

It isn't so, Kimm. Glenn is talking about a street-art installation left 
over from a citywide project, which cut up a car into two pieces, that 
can be used as a bench. These were originally set up in Center City 
on-street parking spaces, to demonstrate the potential of car-free urban 
public spaces. It'll be installed in the new, somewhat empty and 
featureless plaza at the southern tip of Clark Park, at Woodland Ave.


-- Tony West



On 10/16/08 1:54 PM, Glenn moyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

It was revealed last night that FOCP will start selling
advertising rights in Clark Park. So far, a bench in the shape of
one of the car share companies is planned.


OK – someone – please say it ain’t so?

Kimm 




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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park is for sale

[Kimm Tynan]

Ok.  So, just to be clear, FOCP is not selling advertising rights in Clark
Park?  I don¹t have to worry about billboards for payday lenders in the
Park?

Kimm


On 10/16/08 11:00 PM, Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 It isn't so, Kimm. Glenn is talking about a street-art installation left
 over from a citywide project, which cut up a car into two pieces, that
 can be used as a bench. These were originally set up in Center City
 on-street parking spaces, to demonstrate the potential of car-free urban
 public spaces. It'll be installed in the new, somewhat empty and
 featureless plaza at the southern tip of Clark Park, at Woodland Ave.
 
 -- Tony West
 
 
  On 10/16/08 1:54 PM, Glenn moyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  It was revealed last night that FOCP will start selling
  advertising rights in Clark Park. So far, a bench in the shape of
  one of the car share companies is planned.
 
 
  OK ­ someone ­ please say it ain¹t so?
 
  Kimm 
 
 
 
 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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park is for sale

[Anthony West]

Kimm,

How could FoCP possibly sell advertising rights in Clark Park? Clark 
Park is owned by the City of Philadelphia and administered by the Dept. 
of Recreation. FoCP is just the park support group. It's roughly akin to 
the Neighborhood Advisory Councils that connect Rec with the communities 
surrounding its various rec centers. What you don't own, you can't sell.


So no, don't worry. That wasn't a real report, it was just Glenn Moyer 
going on again. He is strictly for suckers.


FoCP isn't perfect -- what association is? But it may be the most open 
public group in all of West and Southwest Philadelphia, with four open 
membership meetings a year and eight board meetings that are also open 
to the public. FoCP has turned out more than 100 persons for major 
meetings. That's a huge number in local politics. Anybody can join, and 
any member can work on any committee they care about.


But be warned! We are passionate about public spaces. So expect passion 
when you join us.


-- Tony West



Kimm Tynan wrote:
Ok. So, just to be clear, FOCP is not selling advertising rights in 
Clark Park? I don’t have to worry about billboards for payday lenders 
in the Park?


Kimm


On 10/16/08 11:00 PM, Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

It isn't so, Kimm. Glenn is talking about a street-art
installation left
over from a citywide project, which cut up a car into two pieces,
that
can be used as a bench. These were originally set up in Center City
on-street parking spaces, to demonstrate the potential of car-free
urban
public spaces. It'll be installed in the new, somewhat empty and
featureless plaza at the southern tip of Clark Park, at Woodland Ave.

-- Tony West


 On 10/16/08 1:54 PM, Glenn moyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 It was revealed last night that FOCP will start selling
 advertising rights in Clark Park. So far, a bench in the shape of
 one of the car share companies is planned.


 OK – someone – please say it ain’t so?

 Kimm



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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park to follow Dutch lead??

[Anthony West]

Those Dutch are so puritanical. What's so bad about off-leash dogs, anyway?

-- Tony West


Frank wrote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1982504/posts

Frank

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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Basketball Court is Open for Use

[deeno7100]

A little late on the reply?because?I do not check this list everyday but?this 
is wonderful news! A very?large part of me will miss the unlevel,?hazardous, 
slippery, rusty and dusty green monster that?me and my game?grew up on. 
However,?I am hopeful that the new court will be appreciated, repsected, and 
used by many?because even though there are better b-ball courts?within close 
proximity of?Clark Park, there is something special about playing under the 
trees and under the guidance of the older?fellas there that play the game the 
right way, peacefully and respectful. This is an aspect hard to find at most 
playgrounds in Philly these days. From a frequent?player who endured 
many?sprained ankles and jammed fingers on this locally?legendary location?... 
A big thanks for the efforts of all involved !! It is greatly appreciated. 

- Sean


-Original Message-
From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UC List UnivCity@list.purple.com
Sent: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:35 am
Subject: [UC] Clark Park Basketball Court is Open for Use


Please spread the word that the Basketball Court just south of the playground 
area is more or less ready for public use. The rims are up, and the sidewalk 
along 43rd street has been repaired.?
?
The court and backboards must wait until the spring for their paint jobs. 
That's when the Friends of Clark Park hope to host a Grand Opening of the 
court.?
?
For now, we'd like to give credit where credit is due: to the partnership that 
brought this new basketball court about. While the FoCP advised on thre 
project, most of the work was done by the Departments of Recreation and Water: 
Rec planned and coordinated the project, while the Water Department installed 
an innovative new stormwater tank/management system under the court to manage 
the rainfall on 43rd street. Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell's office has been 
instrumental in shepherding this project through to its completion.?
?
So pass the word along that basketball has returned to Clark Park!?
?
Brian Siano?
Secretary?
Friends of Clark Park?
?
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.?



More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - 
http://webmail.aol.com

Re: [UC] Clark Park

[Glenn]

The committee process is to plan the public forums. And 

that..is it. Tony West will chair the next meeting.



Sharrieff,

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that you put Mr West in charge of your 
next committee meeting. 

I made my opinions about a single community forum known to you and I hope you 
conveyed them to the committee. Let me reiterate. In order for residents of our 
diverse community to come together in an empowering way and call for UCD 
accountability, a single well-publicized community forum is a potentially 
important goal. 

UCD has shown an unwillingness to communicate and account to the citizens of 
this community. However, we stakeholders have few methods to ask for 
accountability in a transparent public way and few methods to organize to 
ensure it. A properly conducted town meeting could facilitate these important 
goals. . 

It becomes very important that such a forum be conducted impartially and 
professionally so it will be well attended and seen as a credible community 
reaction.

Sharrieff, Mr West is one of the most engaged secret partners of UCD as leader 
of FOCP these past 4 years. He has shown that he is a big supporter of UCD's 
current operating practices. He has published a blatant hatchet job against our 
elected city councilperson in a veiled attempt to excuse the UCD from 
culpability for its violations of law. Mr. West's abusive ad hominem tactics 
and fallacious arguments are well known on this list.

How do you expect any public forum to come from a Tony committee to be seen 
as credible? Please reconsider my earlier suggestion. Let's call for and seek 
an independent professional moderator to conduct a town hall meeting. Either 
Penn and UCD show up and answer our call for answers and transparency in front 
of the media and our elected officials or they do not.

But it can't be Tony turning this into another UCD tightly controlled marketing 
presentation. Please reconsider this. When I and others voted in favor of 
facilitating a community forum to discuss Penn's UCD, I didn't vote for a Tony 
presentation. This isn't going to help the many diverse calls for reform which 
I'm hearing, and will probably hurt them.

Very sincerely,

Glenn

  - Original Message - 
  From: S. Sharrieff Ali 
  To: 'Lewis Mellman' ; univcity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:28 AM
  Subject: RE: [UC] Clark Park


  Lew and All:

   

  I previously posted the notes and planning process, based on

  some of the e-mails I have received, many never read them!

   

  :-) no harm...no problem...

   

  The committee process is to plan the public forums. And 

  that..is it. Tony West will chair the next meeting.

   

  We are not assembling UCD policy recommendations at this time within

  the planning meetings, however there were lively discussions 

  about how we should proceed. Our meetings are limited to planning

  the forums and media, 1 1/2 hours, in and out.

   

  The real issue debates will happen during the public forums, a good

  time to voice any Clark Park related concerns and have them recorded.

   

  Based on your post, are you interested in sniffing comments from the 

  UC-List to post to the FOCP Board list-serv? 

   

  S

   

  -Original Message-

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lewis Mellman

  Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 8:11 PM

  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; univcity@list.purple.com

  Subject: [UC] Clark Park

   

  S. Ali and others,

   

  I regret that I can't attend on 7/19, but I hope to be available for meeting 

  number four.

  There are a number of issues related to Clark Park that I look forward to 

  discussing with you all.

  I am curious what, if anything, concerning Clark Park has been considered at 

  your previous meetings.

  I welcome anyone to contact me off-list to privately share concerns about 

  issues in Clark Park or cc me if your post concerns Clark Park but does 

  not specifically mention Clark Park in the beginning of the subject line 

  (within the first 25-30 characters).

   

  -Lewis Mellman

   

   

  Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD

  Date:  Wednesday July 18th 20Time: 6PM

  Location: Walnut West Library Community Room 40th and Walnut Street

  Planning Meeting # 3

  Duration: 1 ½ hours

  Agenda: Community Stakeholders RE: UCD, planning meeting

  Attendees: Current Committee Members and Public

  Great opportunity for everyone to voice concerns and have your proposals 

  included.

  OPEN TO PUBLIC

   

   

  

  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.

   

   



--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/883 - Release Date: 7/1/2007 
12:19 PM

RE: [UC] Clark Park

[Kyle Cassidy]

Yeah Sharrieff, for crying out loud, your comittee can't represent the 
residents of our diverse community unless Glenn is allowed to hand pick the 
members, sheesh! Don't make him make a formal complaint about you.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
Sent: Thu 7/5/2007 9:46 AM
To: S. Sharrieff Ali; 'Lewis Mellman'; univcity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park
 
The committee process is to plan the public forums. And 

that..is it. Tony West will chair the next meeting.

 

Sharrieff,

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that you put Mr West in charge of your 
next committee meeting. 

I made my opinions about a single community forum known to you and I hope you 
conveyed them to the committee. Let me reiterate. In order for residents of our 
diverse community to come together in an empowering way and call for UCD 
accountability, a single well-publicized community forum is a potentially 
important goal. 

Re: [UC] Clark Park

[Glenn]

RE: [UC] Clark Park
  - Original Message - 
  From: Kyle Cassidy 
  To: Glenn ; S. Sharrieff Ali ; Lewis Mellman ; univcity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 11:14 AM
  Subject: RE: [UC] Clark Park


  Yeah Sharrieff, for crying out loud, your comittee can't represent the 
residents of our diverse community unless Glenn is allowed to hand pick the 
members, sheesh! Don't make him make a formal complaint about you.


  My dear lad,
  When we were discussing the straw man tactic on the list, I really thought 
you would come around and stop trying to misunderstand the points and opinions 
of reasonable people like this response does.  Of course, I realized that you 
lack the ability to refute another's position with logical arguments. I thought 
you'ld stick to kitty stories for a while.

  There are many BID boys like you who have trouble with these difficult 
discussions. Don't feel bad.  BID boys don't need to be so smart.  But I must 
say, young fella, some BID boys could behave themselves a little better.

  Your people must think my comments have been really callous towards you given 
your mental challenges. Cassidy, I will never again doubt your real and genuine 
stupidity. I'm truly sorry but I honestly thought you were simply pretending to 
misunderstand my positions. I thought you actually understood that criticizing 
on the basis of your little mistakes looks like a pathetic, transparently 
simple attempt to create straw man arguments. 

  I finally realize that all along, you were just a simple fellow waiting for 
your UCD door prizes while wallowing in your own drool.

  I'm so sorry for your troubles. But remember Cassidy; you are special too.

  You'll always be a BID boy to me.

  Your smart friend,

  Glenny





  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
  Sent: Thu 7/5/2007 9:46 AM
  To: S. Sharrieff Ali; 'Lewis Mellman'; univcity@list.purple.com
  Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park

  The committee process is to plan the public forums. And

  that..is it. Tony West will chair the next meeting.



  Sharrieff,

  I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that you put Mr West in charge of your 
next committee meeting.

  I made my opinions about a single community forum known to you and I hope you 
conveyed them to the committee. Let me reiterate. In order for residents of our 
diverse community to come together in an empowering way and call for UCD 
accountability, a single well-publicized community forum is a potentially 
important goal.




--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release Date: 7/4/2007 1:40 
PM

RE: [UC] Clark Park

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

Lew..the meeting is 7/18/07  6PM. FYI
 
I don't know if that helps.
 
S
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lewis Mellman
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 8:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; univcity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Clark Park
 
S. Ali and others,
 
I regret that I can't attend on 7/19, but I hope to be available for
meeting 
number four.
There are a number of issues related to Clark Park that I look forward
to 
discussing with you all.
I am curious what, if anything, concerning Clark Park has been
considered at 
your previous meetings.
I welcome anyone to contact me off-list to privately share concerns
about 
issues in Clark Park or cc me if your post concerns Clark Park but
does 
not specifically mention Clark Park in the beginning of the subject line

(within the first 25-30 characters).
 
-Lewis Mellman
 
 
Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD
Date:  Wednesday July 18th 20Time: 6PM
Location: Walnut West Library Community Room 40th and Walnut Street
Planning Meeting # 3
Duration: 1 ½ hours
Agenda: Community Stakeholders RE: UCD, planning meeting
Attendees: Current Committee Members and Public
Great opportunity for everyone to voice concerns and have your proposals

included.
OPEN TO PUBLIC
 
 

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.
 
 

Re: [UC] Clark Park

[Glenn]

Lew,

I have raised the issue of UCD involvement with Clark Park since 2001. You 
saw UCD bar park user groups from the Clark Park Revitalization with 
complete impunity in its first initiative past 40th St.


The steering committee had been handpicked and closed before the initiative 
was even made public. I believe you will remember that I was the leader of 
the largest group of volunteers operating in Clark Park at that time. And 
that I also was repeatedly denied by both the FOCP and UCD to send 
representatives to these secret meetings.


Even within your own membership body at FOCP you will probably remember that 
there was a great deal of anger at this closed, secret, plutocratic process 
that emerged as the members attempted to get approval of the master plan 
rescinded.


Of course, the motion failed by a small margin because the people were lied 
to and told there would be future opportunities to participate in UCD 
redesign and that it was too late to change the centrally planned master 
plan


Lew, I always appreciated your support among the leaders of the Board of 
FOCP for recognizing the outrageous tricks used against me while I was 
trying to cooperate with FOCP leaders. I hope by sending this you are ready 
to stand against this plutocratic machine called UCD. I've heard through the 
grapevine that even among some of the civic association leaders whom have 
been partners with UCD; there is some awakening to the contempt by the UCD 
tactics that have been used against their neighbors.


If the Friends of Clark Park are willing to disengage from the character 
assassinations, I'll be happy to stand together on principals. My principals 
have been consistent all along and I hope you personally realize that is why 
Penn rejects leaders like me. All of the stuff about me was never true; it 
was my principals that UCD, your leaders, and Penn were rejecting.


If there are others within your group that want to reform, let me know. I 
have had years to study the problems with UCD and FOCP and believe I can be 
a big help. Remember a huge part of the problem and the reason UCD used the 
civic associations is due to what your associations have evolved into. The 3 
choice revelation is an example showing everyone that the associations were 
willing to turn their backs on the rights of the rest of us if Penn would 
put them in charge and dangle some carrots.


I hope you are ready for true reform? None of this plutocracy was ever 
necessary to help the trees in Clark Park. None of the contempt for park 
users was necessary; that was a wicked, evil lie!


Sincerely,

Glenn

- Original Message - 
From: Lewis Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; univcity@list.purple.com
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 8:10 PM
Subject: [UC] Clark Park



S. Ali and others,

I regret that I can't attend on 7/19, but I hope to be available for 
meeting number four.
There are a number of issues related to Clark Park that I look forward to 
discussing with you all.
I am curious what, if anything, concerning Clark Park has been considered 
at your previous meetings.
I welcome anyone to contact me off-list to privately share concerns about 
issues in Clark Park or cc me if your post concerns Clark Park but does 
not specifically mention Clark Park in the beginning of the subject line 
(within the first 25-30 characters).


-Lewis Mellman


Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD
Date:  Wednesday July 18th 20Time: 6PM
Location: Walnut West Library Community Room 40th and Walnut Street
Planning Meeting # 3
Duration: 1 ½ hours
Agenda: Community Stakeholders RE: UCD, planning meeting
Attendees: Current Committee Members and Public
Great opportunity for everyone to voice concerns and have your proposals 
included.

OPEN TO PUBLIC



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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 
269.9.14/883 - Release Date: 7/1/2007 12:19 PM






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.

RE: [UC] Clark Park

[S. Sharrieff Ali]

Lew and All:
 
I previously posted the notes and planning process, based on
some of the e-mails I have received, many never read them!
 
:-) no harm...no problem...
 
The committee process is to plan the public forums. And 
that..is it. Tony West will chair the next meeting.
 
We are not assembling UCD policy recommendations at this time within
the planning meetings, however there were lively discussions 
about how we should proceed. Our meetings are limited to planning
the forums and media, 1 1/2 hours, in and out.
 
The real issue debates will happen during the public forums, a good
time to voice any Clark Park related concerns and have them recorded.
 
Based on your post, are you interested in sniffing comments from the 
UC-List to post to the FOCP Board list-serv? 
 
S
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lewis Mellman
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 8:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; univcity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Clark Park
 
S. Ali and others,
 
I regret that I can't attend on 7/19, but I hope to be available for
meeting 
number four.
There are a number of issues related to Clark Park that I look forward
to 
discussing with you all.
I am curious what, if anything, concerning Clark Park has been
considered at 
your previous meetings.
I welcome anyone to contact me off-list to privately share concerns
about 
issues in Clark Park or cc me if your post concerns Clark Park but
does 
not specifically mention Clark Park in the beginning of the subject line

(within the first 25-30 characters).
 
-Lewis Mellman
 
 
Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD
Date:  Wednesday July 18th 20Time: 6PM
Location: Walnut West Library Community Room 40th and Walnut Street
Planning Meeting # 3
Duration: 1 ½ hours
Agenda: Community Stakeholders RE: UCD, planning meeting
Attendees: Current Committee Members and Public
Great opportunity for everyone to voice concerns and have your proposals

included.
OPEN TO PUBLIC
 
 

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.
 
 

Re: [UC] Clark Park

[Brian Siano]

S. Sharrieff Ali wrote:


Lew..the meeting is *7/18/07**  *6PM. FYI

 


I don't know if that helps.


That is the same evening as the FoCP General Membership Meeting.

 


S

 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lewis Mellman

Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 8:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; univcity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Clark Park

 


S. Ali and others,

 

I regret that I can't attend on 7/19, but I hope to be available for 
meeting


number four.

There are a number of issues related to Clark Park that I look forward to

discussing with you all.

I am curious what, if anything, concerning Clark Park has been 
considered at


your previous meetings.

I welcome anyone to contact me off-list to privately share concerns about

issues in Clark Park or cc me if your post concerns Clark Park but does

not specifically mention Clark Park in the beginning of the subject line

(within the first 25-30 characters).

 


-Lewis Mellman

 

 


Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD

Date:  Wednesday July 18th 20Time: 6PM

Location: Walnut West Library Community Room 40th and Walnut Street

Planning Meeting # 3

Duration: 1 ½ hours

Agenda: Community Stakeholders RE: UCD, planning meeting

Attendees: Current Committee Members and Public

Great opportunity for everyone to voice concerns and have your proposals

included.

OPEN TO PUBLIC

 

 




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.

Re: [UC] Clark park Farmer's Market makes the Inky

[Ross Bender]

On 5/19/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 In a message dated 5/19/2007 8:30:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

One of the largest farmers markets in the city, Clark Park demonstrates
a salutary aspect of the phenomenon - revival of the town-square
tradition.

 What? Wendell Lewis wasn't quoted as saying he was delighted to have
this grassroots enterprise contributing to the community at the University
City District's historic Clark Park?  Where is that $74k flackette when we
really need her gringing out the puffery?




Gringing out the  Puffery ???

Nice turn of phrase, Krigman. No idea what it means, but it sounds evil.




--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/clawfoot.html

Re: [UC] Clark park Farmer's Market makes the Inky

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 5/19/2007 8:30:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

One of  the largest farmers markets in the city, Clark Park demonstrates 
a  salutary aspect of the phenomenon - revival of the town-square  tradition.



What? Wendell Lewis wasn't quoted as saying he was delighted to have this  
grassroots enterprise contributing to the community at the University City  
District's historic Clark Park?  Where is that $74k flackette when we  really 
need her gringing out the puffery?  

Al  Krigman
Left of Ivan Grozny




** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 4/19/2007 10:59:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Based on  the evidence of the other day, all you need to do is offer free Ben 
and  Jerry's ice cream and the crowds will come rushing in.  



This is just what UCD has been doing in its ploy to usurp what amounts to  
government authority and control in the neighborhood.
 
IMHO, of course.
 
So, wipe the ice cream off your chin and argue with me that this isn't  the 
case.  

Al  Krigman
Register your opposition to the NID via the Internet to Councilwoman  
Blackwell --
With some background: _www.iconworldwide.com/speakup_ 
(http://www.iconworldwide.com/speakup) 
Go  directly to the form: 
_http://www.iconworldwide.com/speakup/nonid-01.html_ 
(http://www.iconworldwide.com/speakup/nonid-01.html) 




** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Ross Bender]

Argue with YOU?? You want me to engage in rational discourse with a
libertarian anarchist who's so far to the left of Ivan the Terrible that he
don't know what hit him? Surely you jest. Has everybody gone loony? Am I the
only sane one left?

On 4/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 In a message dated 4/19/2007 10:59:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Based on the evidence of the other day, all you need to do is offer free
Ben and Jerry's ice cream and the crowds will come rushing in.

 This is just what UCD has been doing in its ploy to usurp what amounts to
government authority and control in the neighborhood.

IMHO, of course.

So, wipe the ice cream off your chin and argue with me that this isn't the
case.
Al Krigman
Register your opposition to the NID via the Internet to Councilwoman
Blackwell --
With some background: www.iconworldwide.com/speakup
Go directly to the form:
http://www.iconworldwide.com/speakup/nonid-01.html



--
See what's free at AOL.com http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF0002000503.






--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

Ross,

Tony and the gang would be too stupid to announce ice cream night.  They 
would end up sitting in their park eating all the corporate ice cream 
themselves while they blame the UC Review for ignoring them.  

Anyway, your such a do gooder Ross.  Why would the Fiends of Clark park 
condescend to share ice cream with the whores and gang members infesting the 
park.  Poor Brian already is forced to stand among the little people at the 
farmers market frightening them until they give him $15.  

Forget about ice cream, remember the FOCP slogan: Put your money where your 
mouth is, you scum

A very bad whore and gang member,
Glenn the terrible
  - Original Message - 
  From: Ross Bender 
  To: Brian Siano 
  Cc: Univcity 
  Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:58 PM
  Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th


  All good ideas, but a trifle complex and extravagant. Based on the evidence 
of the other day, all you need to do is offer free Ben and Jerry's ice cream 
and the crowds will come rushing in. 


  On 4/19/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glenn wrote:

 Thank you Brian!  Oh my god, thank you Focp!  You have done all this
 just for me!  Oh my god thank you, thank you so much!  It was on the
 kiosk, the bastards!

 Damn the UC Review!  Damn those bastards!  How dare they think the 
 Focp should be ignored as if they're a bunch of assholes!  Let's have
 UCD ticket the bastards!

Seven other ideas considered for publicizing FoCP meetings:

1. Broadcastng with a bullhorn for two weeks in advance, announding the 
time, date, and place of the meeting.
2. Knocking on indivudual doors and, when answered, broadcasting with
the bullhorn directly into people's faces
3. Spilling of suspicious white powder on cerrain street corners, and 
having the Homeland Security people evacuate the neighbors into Griffith
Hall
4. Offering attendees a chance to hear Glenn Moyer speak for fifteen
minutes on FoCP malfeasance, real or imagined, along with copious 
Powerpoint slides, handouts, illustrative diagrams, artist's
conceptions, recitations of testimony, carefully-drawn analogies to the
Bush Administration and the Reichstag Fire, drawings of Tony West as a 
Nazi, and free dashikis to any who sit through the whole thing.
5. Leaving trails of Reese's Pieces leading to USP
6. Mailing postcards to all homes in the area, stating that their water
taps have been poisoned, and the only supply of the antidote is kept at 
Griffith Hall
7. Threatening to kill random dogs in the Bowl unless our attendance
exceeds two hundred people.






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.




  -- 
  Ross Bender
  http://rossbender.org 


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.4/768 - Release Date: 4/19/2007 5:32 
AM

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

West,

Below your post, I copied official email with FOCP to demonstrate that your 
assertions are false.  Your arrogant pretense that anybody can come on down 
to talk to FOCP helps exemplify your contempt for the readers as you believe 
you will continue to bully right under their noses.


In the messages from Jan. 2004, the readers can see that you and Johnny took 
my check to FOCP given to you specifically so I could participate in the dog 
park discussion.  You cashed the check then refused to allow me to 
participate.


The reader can also see that Tony West decides and hand picks how the 
community will be represented within FOCP.  This has been the case since 
2003.


FYI.  I saved my request to the outreach committee to deliver a written 
request from volleyball players to the FOCP  general membership. I saved the 
stakeholder's request.   I saved your refusal that led to a board member's 
resignation.



Glenn Moyer


- Original Message - 
From: Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 11:52 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th


I might add that the vice president and several directors of FoCP are 
renters. Whores, gang members and other criminals are always welcome at 
meetings, especially if they pay like everybody else to support the park. 
If they're prepared to work, they'll be welcome on the Board as well.


The FoCP leadership roster lacks, at this hour, a millionaire 
Penn-affiliated landlord. Glenn Moyer did briefly fulfill that function 
many years ago, but I don't believe anyone from his social class has 
followed in his footsteps since. The park could actually use some input 
from University City's elite, if possible a person who is not 
troublesomely crazy. I am quite serious: The park would be immensely 
strengthened if somebody from our community's propertied echelon would 
contribute their talent, their resources and their good will to this 
dearly beloved, but severely dilapidated, public space. No one else is 
carrying out this duty today.


-- Tony West

Jan 30, 2004 (official correspondence with FOCP leaders Tony West and Johnny 
Snyder)

Glenn,

I got your check so you are paid up. Thanks for volunteering. I advised the 
committee at its first meeting that its members must inevitably deal with 
requests by other FoCP members to participate or provide input in other 
ways; and that they would have to determine their own ability to handle that 
and establish their own procedures for it. The committee will be organizing 
itself when it meets again. Its overall work will take quite some time, so 
there will be no rush to decision-making that might exclude your input.


In the meantime, any member's input that I receive myself, as president or 
as chair of the Membership Committee, I shall forward straight to Jonathan.


-- Tony
Hi Glenn-

Thanks for your email.  I am grateful for your interest in this issue.  Tony 
West had quite a challenge, but has picked a committee in which those who 
are pro leash, anti leash, and undecided are all represented.  At this time 
there are no plans to increase the size of the committee, but I value your 
input.


The first meeting went well.  The committee members introduced themselves, 
and we discussed some of the issues surrounding dogs in the park including 
safety, benefits and costs of a fenced in dog run, the increase in the 
number of unleashed dogs, and effects of moving the tot lot.  My goal is to 
attempt to find solutions in which all park users feel safe and welcome.  If 
you have any ideas to share, comments, or further questions please contact 
me.


-Jonathan Snyder

Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi Jonathan,
 I would very much like to join the committtee discussing the Clark 
Park dog culture.  I've been a part of that culture since 1981 and currently 
bring Sam since 1998.  Also, I have been part of organized discussions about 
the dog culture since 2001, and I have a good bit to contribute on this 
topic.
 My membership recently lapsed so I will drop off a check today to Tony 
West.  Except for that lapse, I have been a member of the association 
continuously since 1996.

 Feel free to call, 215 382 4565. Thank you.

 Glenn Moyer
 Request as FoCP member to help represent the interests of the existing dog 
culture.


Dear readers, Please do not give any money to the Tony West gang.




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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.2/766 - Release Date: 4/18/2007 
7:39 AM






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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

Thanks Brian.  I knew if I ever made even a small mistake the unbroken 
silence from your gang would end.  I thought everyone is to accept your 
gangs usual silence towards my assertions or questions because I'm such a 
liar and crank?  Please send any additional corrections of my 
misinformation.


I apologize for missing the Focp ad. and therefore not mentioning this. 
However, your gang, FOCP, has been instructed by its membership since 2003 
to publish all meetings and meeting agendas in the Almanac section where 
local announcements are found.  This was done in the aftermath of the 
treachery of the FOCP/UCD during its initial attempt to seize Clark Park.


I believe you have an unbroken, 100% refusal record to do this prior to all 
of your so called public meetings since November when this rejected UCD 
redesign was reintroduced after a 5 year gap.


Looking forward to correcting the rest of my misinformation.  Banned from 
FOCP discussions since 2003.


Glenn
- Original Message - 
From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
Cc: Jonathan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



Glenn wrote:


Folks,

Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have 
directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the University 
Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community show in the 
community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP leaders continue to 
have contempt for their members' wishes and the community as a whole.


And folks, _whatever you do_, do NOT look at last week's issue of the 
University City Review, available for viewing at 
http://www.server-jbmultimedia.net/UCReviewFlip/sitebase/index.aspx
Do NOT browse to Page Three, because it does NOT contain a large ad about 
the meeting. Absolutely not. Nuh-uh. Nope. Divert your attention to the 
Page One story about Glenn's heroic stand against paying a trash fine.




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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.2/766 - Release Date: 4/18/2007 
7:39 AM






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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Margie Politzer]

I will step in here to say that FOCP has submitted announcements of all
meetings to the University City Review for the Almanac section. However, the
paper has not always printed them (and they have no obligation to do so).
The only way to ensure that the announcements of meetings would definitely
appear in the paper was to take out an ad. Thus the ad.

Margie P.

 Thanks Brian.  I knew if I ever made even a small mistake the unbroken
 silence from your gang would end.  I thought everyone is to accept your
 gangs usual silence towards my assertions or questions because I'm such a
 liar and crank?  Please send any additional corrections of my
 misinformation.
 
 I apologize for missing the Focp ad. and therefore not mentioning this.
 However, your gang, FOCP, has been instructed by its membership since 2003
 to publish all meetings and meeting agendas in the Almanac section where
 local announcements are found.  This was done in the aftermath of the
 treachery of the FOCP/UCD during its initial attempt to seize Clark Park.
 
 I believe you have an unbroken, 100% refusal record to do this prior to all
 of your so called public meetings since November when this rejected UCD
 redesign was reintroduced after a 5 year gap.
 
 Looking forward to correcting the rest of my misinformation.  Banned from
 FOCP discussions since 2003.
 
 Glenn
 - Original Message -
 From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
 Cc: Jonathan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:52 PM
 Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th
 
 
 Glenn wrote:
 
 Folks,
 
 Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have
 directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the University
 Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community show in the
 community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP leaders continue to
 have contempt for their members' wishes and the community as a whole.
 
 And folks, _whatever you do_, do NOT look at last week's issue of the
 University City Review, available for viewing at
 http://www.server-jbmultimedia.net/UCReviewFlip/sitebase/index.aspx
 Do NOT browse to Page Three, because it does NOT contain a large ad about
 the meeting. Absolutely not. Nuh-uh. Nope. Divert your attention to the
 Page One story about Glenn's heroic stand against paying a trash fine.
 
 
 
 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.
 
 
 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.2/766 - Release Date: 4/18/2007
 7:39 AM
 
 
 
 
 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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

Margie,

In all of my years dealing with the UC Review, I never had problems getting 
public announcements in the paper.  The deadlines and guidelines are easy to 
follow.  Are you sure you stand by the implicit criticism you make?


Let's pull out all of the issues 3 weeks prior to FOCP meetings since 
November.  That is when Tony West announced that 17 public meetings had 
informed the community that the rejected redesign of Clark park had become 
policy.  I'm pretty sure that FOCP failed 100% of the time to get their 
announcement of the redesign published in the UC Review Almanac.  Something 
is wrong here.  Are you claiming that this was the fault of the paper


The FOCP members wishes, to direct their leaders to deal openly and honestly 
with the larger community, seem perfectly reasonable for citizens in a 
republic.  Announcing the intention to redesign the public park must show a 
good faith attempt at communication with that public.


The excuses for not attempting the most basic step towards informing the 
public do not work, Margie.  The members had to make this demand for 
openness specifically via motion to an FOCP which had previously refused to 
announce meetings to their own members.  Let's not forget during the first 
attempt to force the UCD redesign of the park; the FOCP Board refused almost 
always to announce the time, date, and location of their meetings to their 
own members.


Please don't blame the newspaper.

Glenn


- Original Message - 
From: Margie Politzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: University City listserv Univcity@list.purple.com
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



I will step in here to say that FOCP has submitted announcements of all
meetings to the University City Review for the Almanac section. However, 
the

paper has not always printed them (and they have no obligation to do so).
The only way to ensure that the announcements of meetings would definitely
appear in the paper was to take out an ad. Thus the ad.

Margie P.


Thanks Brian.  I knew if I ever made even a small mistake the unbroken
silence from your gang would end.  I thought everyone is to accept your
gangs usual silence towards my assertions or questions because I'm such a
liar and crank?  Please send any additional corrections of my
misinformation.

I apologize for missing the Focp ad. and therefore not mentioning this.
However, your gang, FOCP, has been instructed by its membership since 
2003

to publish all meetings and meeting agendas in the Almanac section where
local announcements are found.  This was done in the aftermath of the
treachery of the FOCP/UCD during its initial attempt to seize Clark Park.

I believe you have an unbroken, 100% refusal record to do this prior to 
all

of your so called public meetings since November when this rejected UCD
redesign was reintroduced after a 5 year gap.

Looking forward to correcting the rest of my misinformation.  Banned from
FOCP discussions since 2003.

Glenn
- Original Message -
From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
Cc: Jonathan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



Glenn wrote:


Folks,

Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have
directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the University
Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community show in the
community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP leaders continue 
to

have contempt for their members' wishes and the community as a whole.


And folks, _whatever you do_, do NOT look at last week's issue of the
University City Review, available for viewing at
http://www.server-jbmultimedia.net/UCReviewFlip/sitebase/index.aspx
Do NOT browse to Page Three, because it does NOT contain a large ad 
about

the meeting. Absolutely not. Nuh-uh. Nope. Divert your attention to the
Page One story about Glenn's heroic stand against paying a trash fine.



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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.2/766 - Release Date: 4/18/2007
7:39 AM





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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.4/768 - Release Date: 4/19/2007 
5:32 AM






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

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Margie Politzer]

Glenn,

I know it to be true that FOCP submitted announcements to the UC Review for
the Almanac section and they did not appear. That is why an ad was taken
out, to ensure that the public be informed.

Margie


 Margie,
 
 In all of my years dealing with the UC Review, I never had problems getting
 public announcements in the paper.  The deadlines and guidelines are easy to
 follow.  Are you sure you stand by the implicit criticism you make?
 
 Let's pull out all of the issues 3 weeks prior to FOCP meetings since
 November.  That is when Tony West announced that 17 public meetings had
 informed the community that the rejected redesign of Clark park had become
 policy.  I'm pretty sure that FOCP failed 100% of the time to get their
 announcement of the redesign published in the UC Review Almanac.  Something
 is wrong here.  Are you claiming that this was the fault of the paper
 
 The FOCP members wishes, to direct their leaders to deal openly and honestly
 with the larger community, seem perfectly reasonable for citizens in a
 republic.  Announcing the intention to redesign the public park must show a
 good faith attempt at communication with that public.
 
 The excuses for not attempting the most basic step towards informing the
 public do not work, Margie.  The members had to make this demand for
 openness specifically via motion to an FOCP which had previously refused to
 announce meetings to their own members.  Let's not forget during the first
 attempt to force the UCD redesign of the park; the FOCP Board refused almost
 always to announce the time, date, and location of their meetings to their
 own members.
 
 Please don't blame the newspaper.
 
 Glenn
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Margie Politzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: University City listserv Univcity@list.purple.com
 Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:25 AM
 Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th
 
 
 I will step in here to say that FOCP has submitted announcements of all
 meetings to the University City Review for the Almanac section. However,
 the
 paper has not always printed them (and they have no obligation to do so).
 The only way to ensure that the announcements of meetings would definitely
 appear in the paper was to take out an ad. Thus the ad.
 
 Margie P.
 
 Thanks Brian.  I knew if I ever made even a small mistake the unbroken
 silence from your gang would end.  I thought everyone is to accept your
 gangs usual silence towards my assertions or questions because I'm such a
 liar and crank?  Please send any additional corrections of my
 misinformation.
 
 I apologize for missing the Focp ad. and therefore not mentioning this.
 However, your gang, FOCP, has been instructed by its membership since
 2003
 to publish all meetings and meeting agendas in the Almanac section where
 local announcements are found.  This was done in the aftermath of the
 treachery of the FOCP/UCD during its initial attempt to seize Clark Park.
 
 I believe you have an unbroken, 100% refusal record to do this prior to
 all
 of your so called public meetings since November when this rejected UCD
 redesign was reintroduced after a 5 year gap.
 
 Looking forward to correcting the rest of my misinformation.  Banned from
 FOCP discussions since 2003.
 
 Glenn
 - Original Message -
 From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
 Cc: Jonathan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:52 PM
 Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th
 
 
 Glenn wrote:
 
 Folks,
 
 Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have
 directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the University
 Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community show in the
 community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP leaders continue
 to
 have contempt for their members' wishes and the community as a whole.
 
 And folks, _whatever you do_, do NOT look at last week's issue of the
 University City Review, available for viewing at
 http://www.server-jbmultimedia.net/UCReviewFlip/sitebase/index.aspx
 Do NOT browse to Page Three, because it does NOT contain a large ad
 about
 the meeting. Absolutely not. Nuh-uh. Nope. Divert your attention to the
 Page One story about Glenn's heroic stand against paying a trash fine.
 
 
 
 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.
 
 
 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.2/766 - Release Date: 4/18/2007
 7:39 AM
 
 
 
 
 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

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

OK.  I'll accept that.  Previously, you said submitted announcements of all 
meetings.  I still do not believe that statement.


There has been a serious failure that has kept the public uninformed about 
the imminent redesign of their park.  There has been a serious failure to 
deliver upon the FOCP members desire for openness and transparency from the 
association leaders.


We should understand how much of this was a failure or recalcitrancy on the 
part of the UC Review and how much is the failure of the FOCP leaders to 
accomplish this most basic and important duty?  Do you agree?


If we add up all of the issues, (3 prior to each FOCP meeting), how many 
announcements were sent to the UC Review for the Almanac section?  I 
appreciate any clarifying information.


Thanks,
Glenn
- Original Message - 
From: Margie Politzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: University City listserv Univcity@list.purple.com
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



Glenn,

I know it to be true that FOCP submitted announcements to the UC Review 
for

the Almanac section and they did not appear. That is why an ad was taken
out, to ensure that the public be informed.

Margie



Margie,

In all of my years dealing with the UC Review, I never had problems 
getting
public announcements in the paper.  The deadlines and guidelines are easy 
to

follow.  Are you sure you stand by the implicit criticism you make?

Let's pull out all of the issues 3 weeks prior to FOCP meetings since
November.  That is when Tony West announced that 17 public meetings had
informed the community that the rejected redesign of Clark park had 
become

policy.  I'm pretty sure that FOCP failed 100% of the time to get their
announcement of the redesign published in the UC Review Almanac. 
Something

is wrong here.  Are you claiming that this was the fault of the paper

The FOCP members wishes, to direct their leaders to deal openly and 
honestly

with the larger community, seem perfectly reasonable for citizens in a
republic.  Announcing the intention to redesign the public park must show 
a

good faith attempt at communication with that public.

The excuses for not attempting the most basic step towards informing the
public do not work, Margie.  The members had to make this demand for
openness specifically via motion to an FOCP which had previously refused 
to
announce meetings to their own members.  Let's not forget during the 
first
attempt to force the UCD redesign of the park; the FOCP Board refused 
almost
always to announce the time, date, and location of their meetings to 
their

own members.

Please don't blame the newspaper.

Glenn


- Original Message -
From: Margie Politzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: University City listserv Univcity@list.purple.com
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



I will step in here to say that FOCP has submitted announcements of all
meetings to the University City Review for the Almanac section. However,
the
paper has not always printed them (and they have no obligation to do 
so).
The only way to ensure that the announcements of meetings would 
definitely

appear in the paper was to take out an ad. Thus the ad.

Margie P.


Thanks Brian.  I knew if I ever made even a small mistake the unbroken
silence from your gang would end.  I thought everyone is to accept your
gangs usual silence towards my assertions or questions because I'm such 
a

liar and crank?  Please send any additional corrections of my
misinformation.

I apologize for missing the Focp ad. and therefore not mentioning 
this.

However, your gang, FOCP, has been instructed by its membership since
2003
to publish all meetings and meeting agendas in the Almanac section 
where

local announcements are found.  This was done in the aftermath of the
treachery of the FOCP/UCD during its initial attempt to seize Clark 
Park.


I believe you have an unbroken, 100% refusal record to do this prior to
all
of your so called public meetings since November when this rejected 
UCD

redesign was reintroduced after a 5 year gap.

Looking forward to correcting the rest of my misinformation.  Banned 
from

FOCP discussions since 2003.

Glenn
- Original Message -
From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
Cc: Jonathan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



Glenn wrote:


Folks,

Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have
directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the 
University
Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community show in 
the
community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP leaders 
continue

to
have contempt for their members' wishes and the community as a whole.


And folks, _whatever you do_, do NOT look at last week's issue of the
University City Review

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Brian Siano]

Glenn wrote:

Thanks Brian.  I knew if I ever made even a small mistake the unbroken 
silence from your gang would end.  I thought everyone is to accept 
your gangs usual silence towards my assertions or questions because 
I'm such a liar and crank?  Please send any additional corrections of 
my misinformation.


I apologize for missing the Focp ad. and therefore not mentioning 
this. However, your gang, FOCP, has been instructed by its membership 
since 2003 to publish all meetings and meeting agendas in the Almanac 
section where local announcements are found.  This was done in the 
aftermath of the treachery of the FOCP/UCD during its initial attempt 
to seize Clark Park.


I believe you have an unbroken, 100% refusal record to do this prior 
to all of your so called public meetings since November when this 
rejected UCD redesign was reintroduced after a 5 year gap. 


More lies. The fact is, Christine Ethier has been very, very good at 
contacting the _Review_ to get our meetinghs into the Almanac. And the 
Review has been fairly consistent in missing our listings. So we took 
the added step of buying an ad in the Review.  Also, we've posted the 
meetings on our open-access, the-entire-public-can-browse-it website at 
http://www.clarkpark.info. Our public meetings about the Park A project 
have been widely publicized on this list, in our newsletter, and on the 
public-access kiosk.


Face it, Glenn; you simply _make up_ these claims. I just caught you out 
on it.


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

Thank you Brian!  Oh my god, thank you Focp!  You have done all this just 
for me!  Oh my god thank you, thank you so much!  It was on the kiosk, the 
bastards!


Damn the UC Review!  Damn those bastards!  How dare they think the Focp 
should be ignored as if they're a bunch of assholes!  Let's have UCD ticket 
the bastards!


Your humble servant, thank you for pointing out my lies.

Glenn the terrrible

- Original Message - 
From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Cc: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



Glenn wrote:

Thanks Brian.  I knew if I ever made even a small mistake the unbroken 
silence from your gang would end.  I thought everyone is to accept your 
gangs usual silence towards my assertions or questions because I'm such a 
liar and crank?  Please send any additional corrections of my 
misinformation.


I apologize for missing the Focp ad. and therefore not mentioning this. 
However, your gang, FOCP, has been instructed by its membership since 
2003 to publish all meetings and meeting agendas in the Almanac section 
where local announcements are found.  This was done in the aftermath of 
the treachery of the FOCP/UCD during its initial attempt to seize Clark 
Park.


I believe you have an unbroken, 100% refusal record to do this prior to 
all of your so called public meetings since November when this rejected 
UCD redesign was reintroduced after a 5 year gap.


More lies. The fact is, Christine Ethier has been very, very good at 
contacting the _Review_ to get our meetinghs into the Almanac. And the 
Review has been fairly consistent in missing our listings. So we took the 
added step of buying an ad in the Review.  Also, we've posted the meetings 
on our open-access, the-entire-public-can-browse-it website at 
http://www.clarkpark.info. Our public meetings about the Park A project 
have been widely publicized on this list, in our newsletter, and on the 
public-access kiosk.


Face it, Glenn; you simply _make up_ these claims. I just caught you out 
on it.


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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.4/768 - Release Date: 4/19/2007 
5:32 AM






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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Brian Siano]

Glenn wrote:

Thank you Brian!  Oh my god, thank you Focp!  You have done all this 
just for me!  Oh my god thank you, thank you so much!  It was on the 
kiosk, the bastards!


Damn the UC Review!  Damn those bastards!  How dare they think the 
Focp should be ignored as if they're a bunch of assholes!  Let's have 
UCD ticket the bastards! 


Seven other ideas considered for publicizing FoCP meetings:

1. Broadcastng with a bullhorn for two weeks in advance, announding the 
time, date, and place of the meeting.
2. Knocking on indivudual doors and, when answered, broadcasting with 
the bullhorn directly into people's faces
3. Spilling of suspicious white powder on cerrain street corners, and 
having the Homeland Security people evacuate the neighbors into Griffith 
Hall
4. Offering attendees a chance to hear Glenn Moyer speak for fifteen 
minutes on FoCP malfeasance, real or imagined, along with copious 
Powerpoint slides, handouts, illustrative diagrams, artist's 
conceptions, recitations of testimony, carefully-drawn analogies to the 
Bush Administration and the Reichstag Fire, drawings of Tony West as a 
Nazi, and free dashikis to any who sit through the whole thing.

5. Leaving trails of Reese's Pieces leading to USP
6. Mailing postcards to all homes in the area, stating that their water 
taps have been poisoned, and the only supply of the antidote is kept at 
Griffith Hall
7. Threatening to kill random dogs in the Bowl unless our attendance 
exceeds two hundred people.







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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Ross Bender]

All good ideas, but a trifle complex and extravagant. Based on the evidence
of the other day, all you need to do is offer free Ben and Jerry's ice cream
and the crowds will come rushing in.

On 4/19/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Glenn wrote:

 Thank you Brian!  Oh my god, thank you Focp!  You have done all this
 just for me!  Oh my god thank you, thank you so much!  It was on the
 kiosk, the bastards!

 Damn the UC Review!  Damn those bastards!  How dare they think the
 Focp should be ignored as if they're a bunch of assholes!  Let's have
 UCD ticket the bastards!

Seven other ideas considered for publicizing FoCP meetings:

1. Broadcastng with a bullhorn for two weeks in advance, announding the
time, date, and place of the meeting.
2. Knocking on indivudual doors and, when answered, broadcasting with
the bullhorn directly into people's faces
3. Spilling of suspicious white powder on cerrain street corners, and
having the Homeland Security people evacuate the neighbors into Griffith
Hall
4. Offering attendees a chance to hear Glenn Moyer speak for fifteen
minutes on FoCP malfeasance, real or imagined, along with copious
Powerpoint slides, handouts, illustrative diagrams, artist's
conceptions, recitations of testimony, carefully-drawn analogies to the
Bush Administration and the Reichstag Fire, drawings of Tony West as a
Nazi, and free dashikis to any who sit through the whole thing.
5. Leaving trails of Reese's Pieces leading to USP
6. Mailing postcards to all homes in the area, stating that their water
taps have been poisoned, and the only supply of the antidote is kept at
Griffith Hall
7. Threatening to kill random dogs in the Bowl unless our attendance
exceeds two hundred people.






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.





--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

Folks,

Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have 
directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the University 
Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community show in the 
community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP leaders continue to 
have contempt for their members' wishes and the community as a whole.


So please keep your mouths shut about this.  Whores, gang members, renters 
and other criminals are not wanted at tonights show.


Johnny, don't forget to apologize for my misinformation,

A criminal
- Original Message - 
From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
Cc: Jonathan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:47 PM
Subject: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



Posted on behalf of FoCP President Jonathan Snyder:

Dear UCListseve Community:

I am sorry that Glenn Moyer has subjected you to misinformation about the 
Friends of Clark Park (FoCP).  Please feel free to attend our quarterly 
membership meeting on Wednesday, April 18th at 7:30 pm in Griffith Hall to 
find out more information about us. This meeting is open to non-FoCP 
members too, although anyone is welcome to join. If you have any specific 
questions, please feel free to contact me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit our website at 
www.clarkpark.info http://www.clarkpark.info/.


Jonathan Snyder
FoCP President




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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.14/727 - Release Date: 3/19/2007 
11:49 AM






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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Brian Siano]

Glenn wrote:


Folks,

Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have 
directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the 
University Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community 
show in the community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP 
leaders continue to have contempt for their members' wishes and the 
community as a whole. 


And folks, _whatever you do_, do NOT look at last week's issue of the 
University City Review, available for viewing at 
http://www.server-jbmultimedia.net/UCReviewFlip/sitebase/index.aspx
Do NOT browse to Page Three, because it does NOT contain a large ad 
about the meeting. Absolutely not. Nuh-uh. Nope. Divert your attention 
to the Page One story about Glenn's heroic stand against paying a trash 
fine.




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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Anthony West]

I might add that the vice president and several directors of FoCP are 
renters. Whores, gang members and other criminals are always welcome at 
meetings, especially if they pay like everybody else to support the park. If 
they're prepared to work, they'll be welcome on the Board as well.


The FoCP leadership roster lacks, at this hour, a millionaire 
Penn-affiliated landlord. Glenn Moyer did briefly fulfill that function many 
years ago, but I don't believe anyone from his social class has followed in 
his footsteps since. The park could actually use some input from University 
City's elite, if possible a person who is not troublesomely crazy. I am 
quite serious: The park would be immensely strengthened if somebody from our 
community's propertied echelon would contribute their talent, their 
resources and their good will to this dearly beloved, but severely 
dilapidated, public space. No one else is carrying out this duty today.


-- Tony West


Glenn wrote:
Don't forget the really big show tonight.  Although the members have 
directed the FOCP to publicly announce their meetings in the University 
Review, the leaders forgot to announce tonights community show in the 
community paper.  I hope no one was shocked that FOCP leaders continue to 
have contempt for their members' wishes and the community as a whole.



From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And folks, _whatever you do_, do NOT look at last week's issue of the 
University City Review, available for viewing at 
http://www.server-jbmultimedia.net/UCReviewFlip/sitebase/index.aspx
Do NOT browse to Page Three, because it does NOT contain a large ad about 
the meeting. Absolutely not. Nuh-uh. Nope. Divert your attention to the 
Page One story about Glenn's heroic stand against paying a trash fine.




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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th

[Glenn]

- Original Message - 
From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Univcity Univcity@list.purple.com
Cc: Jonathan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:47 PM
Subject: [UC] Clark Park Quarterly Meeting, April 18th



Posted on behalf of FoCP President Jonathan Snyder:

Dear UCListseve Community:

I am sorry that Glenn Moyer has subjected you to misinformation about the 
Friends of Clark Park (FoCP).  Please feel free to attend our quarterly 
membership meeting on Wednesday, April 18th at 7:30 pm in Griffith Hall to 
find out more information about us. This meeting is open to non-FoCP 
members too, although anyone is welcome to join. If you have any specific 
questions, please feel free to contact me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit our website at 
www.clarkpark.info http://www.clarkpark.info/.


Jonathan Snyder
FoCP President


Good morning Mr. President,

Hey Jonathon,

You needn't apologize for my misinformation, lies or even my bad character.. 
Someone might think you are making a classic ad hominem comment (it means, 
against the man) rather than actually correcting any misinformation. Someone 
might even interpret a phony apology as condescending towards the readers 
who will know that no apology from you would be necessary if you speak the 
truth.  In fact, I would call it your DUTY as president of FOCP to expose my 
misinformation.  Please provide the specific misinformation  I provided to 
the list and correct it?


I hope you don't mind if I keep this announcement while I awaite your 
corrections and use it in the future?


Years ago, I begged your predecessors at FOCP not to make me the instrument 
of their future embarrassment. Please Jonathon, I don't know you yet you 
answered me directly in the park that I am banned from community discussions 
since I am destructive.


We're not going to be friends but please don't join the FOCP ad hominem 
machine. For your own reputation Jonathon, please forward to this university 
city email list MY misinformation and the corrections.  I bet if you sent a 
sincere apology to the list that could also work for you, but I would really 
try to make it sincere.  Thank you Mr. President.


Brian, thanks for forwarding this to the list on behalf of FOCP and its 
president.


Sincerely,

Glenn Moyer

Citizen of West Philadelphia.




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.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.14/727 - Release Date: 3/19/2007 
11:49 AM






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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted

[Margie Politzer]

David,

I live in Cedar Park, and certainly consider Clark Park to be an important
part of the neighborhood. I don¹t see any reason why we have to think in
terms of micro-communities (i.e. Cedar Park vs. Spruce Hill) when
considering a mural that celebrates the neighborhood.

Thanks,
Margie P.


Hi All,

I asked Jed for pictures of the clark park festival because I wanted to get
pictures of groups of people outdoors to use in a general way as references
for figures in the mural. I thought that there might be some interesting
pictures of people in different poses to spur my imagination for how people
could be posed in the mural.

I would very much like to look at pictures of events in Cedar Park.  I have
taken pictures of Cedar Park myself for the mural,  as well as looked at
pictures on the Cedar Park Neighbors website.  If you have pictures of
events in Cedar park I would really like to look at them. You can email some
to me or I would be happy to come to you to meet in person.

While Clark Park is not within the boundaries of Cedar Park, I felt that
many Cedar Park residents use Clark Park and that it is part of the story of
the neighborhood as well.  Please let me know what you think. There are two
big walls and I want to be thorough in capturing a portrait of people's
lives in the area around 47th and Baltimore. 

I really want to do a good job that you will all be happy with for these
murals. please contact me with any ideas or concerns.

David

Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out door activities?

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 3/5/2007 12:00:06 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Just  yesterday, I was trying to explain to my son how racism is sustained
by  people who do not intend to be part of the  problem.



You could have used the debate over the application for a zoning variance  to 
allow a state liquor store in the 4200 block of Walnut as another example.  
I'm sure that all of the proponents celebrate the diversity of this community  
and don't consider themselves racist. But, isn't insensitivity to the cultural 
 mores of a minority group a form of racism akin to what you discussed with 
your  son?
 
Always at  your service and ready for a dialog ® brand resident and housing  
provider,
Al Krigman
BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free 
email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at 
http://www.aol.com.

RE: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out door activities?

[Kyle Cassidy]

It's only diverse if different people can live next to each other. When
you say no, you can't live next door to me cause I don't like you
that's not diverse. 

A catholic church next to an abortion clinic? That's diversity.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 12:29 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out
door activities?

In a message dated 3/5/2007 12:00:06 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Just yesterday, I was trying to explain to my son how racism is
sustained
by people who do not intend to be part of the problem.


You could have used the debate over the application for a zoning
variance to allow a state liquor store in the 4200 block of Walnut as
another example. I'm sure that all of the proponents celebrate the
diversity of this community and don't consider themselves racist. But,
isn't insensitivity to the cultural mores of a minority group a form of
racism akin to what you discussed with your son?
 
Always at your service and ready for a dialog (r) brand resident and
housing provider, Al Krigman





AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at AOL.com
http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redi
r=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom . 


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to - diversity

[Craigsolve]

 
In a message dated 3/5/2007 12:48:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

A  catholic church next to an abortion clinic? That's  diversity


That is an interesting euphemism for The slaughtering of lambs at the foot  
of God.
 
Even the Third World has evolved - from accreting power by cutting out  the 
beating heart from a living man to Drink Guinness for Power.
 
Yup, we need to drink more to secure peace in the Hood. Wait a minute, I  
thought homogeneity was bad.
 
Ciao,
 
Craig
 
 
 
 
BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free 
email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at 
http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out door activities?

[Mike]

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 12:29:08 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

 In a message dated 3/5/2007 12:00:06 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Just  yesterday, I was trying to explain to my son how racism is
 sustained by  people who do not intend to be part of the  problem.

 You could have used the debate over the application for a zoning
 variance  to allow a state liquor store in the 4200 block of Walnut as
 another  example. I'm sure that all of the proponents celebrate the
 diversity of this  community and don't consider themselves racist.
 But, isn't insensitivity to the cultural mores of a minority group a
 form of racism akin to what you discussed  with your  son?

No.

First, Islam is a religion, not a race.

Second, no-one in this discussion has shown insensitivity to any group's
cultural mores. The objection is based on the question of how far we
should go in allowing conflicting minority cultural values to impose
themselves on the political and cultural structures of the surrounding
community.

Third, even supposing the above two points were false, insensitivity to
the cultural mores of a racial group is not racism, unless you believe
that the cultural mores of that group are specifically and completely
determined by their racial characteristics, or if you believe that ALL
people of a particular racial group, and ONLY people of that racial
group, hold those cultural values. Both of those assertions seem a lot
more condescending and discriminatory than any other view that has been
raised in this discussion.

Mike S.

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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out door activities?

[Elizabeth F Campion]

Kyle, 

I'm not moving, unless a truly great UC opportunity arrives.
And my home is zoned residential.
And, I am one of those conflicted Pro-Choice / Anti Death Penalty
Catholics who prays that no women will ever feel the need for abortion,
and no Nation will ever resort to taking lives in the name of
rehabilitation.

So, stop beating the bushes for a response to this particular
provocation.
For most of us it is much too complicated an issue to make for fun or
brevity.

When do I get the photos I paid for at your opening?
Stop playing and get to developing prints!

Liz

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 12:47:26 -0500 Kyle Cassidy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
 It's only diverse if different people can live next to each other. 
 When
 you say no, you can't live next door to me cause I don't like you
 that's not diverse. 
 
 A catholic church next to an abortion clinic? That's diversity.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 12:29 PM
 To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
 Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out
 door activities?
 
 In a message dated 3/5/2007 12:00:06 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
   Just yesterday, I was trying to explain to my son how racism 
 is
 sustained
   by people who do not intend to be part of the problem.
   
 
 You could have used the debate over the application for a zoning
 variance to allow a state liquor store in the 4200 block of Walnut as
 another example. I'm sure that all of the proponents celebrate the
 diversity of this community and don't consider themselves racist. 
 But,
 isn't insensitivity to the cultural mores of a minority group a form 
 of
 racism akin to what you discussed with your son?
  
 Always at your service and ready for a dialog (r) brand resident and
 housing provider, Al Krigman


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out door activities?

[Elizabeth F Campion]

Mike and List,

Mike's  first point assumes a perception that the mosque at 42nd and
Walnut enjoys significant racial diversity.
It is not a perception supported by the evidence of my eyes.

Mike's second point is false because it is based upon a false premise
of Owner privilege.
The property in question is zoned R-9 RESIDENTIAL.
A change is being requested and might be imposed on an entire
neighborhood.
It seems manipulative to me to pretend that the process for changes does
not invite reasonable protest.
And it seems racist and culturally insensitive to further manipulate the
discussion by pretending the only protest swears allegiance to Islam.

Mike's third point is false by nature of its absolutes.
In a post 911 world, any Moslem population risks Us Vs. Them comparisons.
And the people suffering may be Sikhs or Hindus, but skin color (and
sometimes costume or accent) are being used to define the differences
more often than any real or first hand knowledge of the beliefs.

Why open dialogue if all the answers are already known?


Mike, I am surprised you have bought so completely into the spin.
I am beginning to suspect it is personal, perhaps an anti-Al bias.

This UnivCity group demonstrates some insensitivity by its very nature.
Neighbors who don't have easy access to a computer, reasonable computer
literacy and entree to the list(s) are outsiders.
And little attempt is made to bring outsiders in.
Smaller in lists proliferate.
Occasionally one will be posted without Bcc's and the machinations become
more obvious.
Further, this list group provides regular and mores specific examples of
blatant class, cultural and racial insensitivity.
Luckily, some of the worst examples bring passionate defenses than may
help educate us all.

Best!
Liz


On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:28:54 -0500 Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 No.
 
 First, Islam is a religion, not a race.
 
 Second, no-one in this discussion has shown insensitivity to any 
 group's
 cultural mores. The objection is based on the question of how far we
 should go in allowing conflicting minority cultural values to impose
 themselves on the political and cultural structures of the 
 surrounding
 community.
 
 Third, even supposing the above two points were false, insensitivity 
 to
 the cultural mores of a racial group is not racism, unless you 
 believe
 that the cultural mores of that group are specifically and 
 completely
 determined by their racial characteristics, or if you believe that 
 ALL
 people of a particular racial group, and ONLY people of that racial
 group, hold those cultural values. Both of those assertions seem a 
 lot
 more condescending and discriminatory than any other view that has 
 been
 raised in this discussion.
 
 Mike S.
 On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 12:29:08 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 
  In a message dated 3/5/2007 12:00:06 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
  Just  yesterday, I was trying to explain to my son how racism is
  sustained by  people who do not intend to be part of the  
 problem.
 
  You could have used the debate over the application for a zoning
  variance  to allow a state liquor store in the 4200 block of 
 Walnut as
  another  example. I'm sure that all of the proponents celebrate 
 the
  diversity of this  community and don't consider themselves racist.
  But, isn't insensitivity to the cultural mores of a minority group 
 a
  form of racism akin to what you discussed  with your  son?
 


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out door activities?

[Elizabeth F Campion]

Mike,

Philosophical training or not:

It seems sloppy to me that some vocal proponents continue to ignore that
the property has RESIDENTIAL ZONING and 
are pretend that a defending against a ZONING CHANGE is the same thing as
imposing or acting to dictate their views upon the rest of the
neighborhood.
The parties bringing the change have the obligation to sell their choice.

It seems lazy (and manipulative) to me to frame the Opponents as almost
exclusively Muslim.

It seems ingenious to me to pretend, as regards to the Mosque at 42nd and
Walnut, that the population has a make up that is racially inclusive (in
more than philosophy).


I signed the petition for the Store, based on logical reasons, but I find
myself getting so disgusted with the tactics being used that I'd want to
distance myself from the matter.
I am not a philosopher, but I can tell when a dead fish has been left in
the sun for too long.

Best!
Liz


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park our default setting when it comes to out door activities?

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 3/5/2007 4:57:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

It seems  sloppy to me that some vocal proponents continue to ignore that
the  property has RESIDENTIAL ZONING and 
are pretend that a defending against a  ZONING CHANGE is the same thing as
imposing or acting to dictate their  views upon the rest of the
neighborhood.
The parties bringing the change  have the obligation to sell their choice.



Earlier in this debate, the idea was also put forward that zoning provides  
the people likely to be affected by the use of a particular property a  
reasonable expectation as to its continuing use. On this basis, zoning  
variances 
should be difficult to obtain. And, as Liz says above, the burden  should be on 
those who want the change to make their case, and not on those who  want to 
preserve what things are at present.
 
Part of case for advocating or opposing the change should involve a  
discussion of the impact on the affected parties. And, as I think the people in 
 the 
community did well in the case of the proposed zoning change to allow a  
homeless shelter at 45th  Walnut (thanks to a pro-active survey devised and  
managed in an unbiased manner by Theresa Sims and Karen Allen), weighted  
responses 
according to the distance respondents were located from the site in  question. 
 

Always at  your service and ready for a dialog ® brand resident and housing  
provider,
Al Krigman

BRBRBR**BR AOL now offers free 
email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at 
http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted

[MLamond]

In a message dated 3/4/07 12:24:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


 A mural artist has been contracted to depict a scene
 of a Clark Park festival.  (Mural to go on the 4700
 block of Baltimore.)  He approached me for pictures to
 look at for inspiration.  I pointed him to Sean Dorn,
 who's been hard to get ahold of lately.
 
 If anyone has pictures of past Festivals (particularly
 in virtual form) that might be helpful in this regard,
 please forward them (or a link) to me before midweek
 (March 6th or so), and I will pass them along to the
 artist. 
 
 Thanks,
 Jed.
 
Jed, thanks for posting this information.

I'm wondering why a mural in the Cedar Park neighborhood, at 47th  
Baltimore, would depict festivities in the Spruce Hill neighborhood's CLARK 
Park, 
rather than fairs in the Cedar Park neighborhood's CEDAR Park.   Are you sure 
that 
is the plan?   Who made that decision?   It strikes me as pretty odd.

Melani Lamond




Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban  Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101


**
 AOL now offers 
free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at 
http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted

[Vincent/Roger]

I think that the artist, David Guinn, is looking for a wide range of ideas.  He 
asked me if we had some photos of the Cedar Park Fair.  It is also possible 
that there's a confusion about Cedar Park and Clark Park, and of course 
this is not the first time people have confused the two.  
Roger Harman  
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; univcity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 11:35 AM
  Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted



  In a message dated 3/4/07 12:24:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:



A mural artist has been contracted to depict a scene
of a Clark Park festival.  (Mural to go on the 4700
block of Baltimore.)  He approached me for pictures to
look at for inspiration.  I pointed him to Sean Dorn,
who's been hard to get ahold of lately.

If anyone has pictures of past Festivals (particularly
in virtual form) that might be helpful in this regard,
please forward them (or a link) to me before midweek
(March 6th or so), and I will pass them along to the
artist. 

Thanks,
Jed.


  Jed, thanks for posting this information.

  I'm wondering why a mural in the Cedar Park neighborhood, at 47th  
Baltimore, would depict festivities in the Spruce Hill neighborhood's CLARK 
Park, rather than fairs in the Cedar Park neighborhood's CEDAR Park.  Are you 
sure that is the plan?  Who made that decision?  It strikes me as pretty odd.

  Melani Lamond




  Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
  Urban  Bye, Realtor
  3529 Lancaster Ave.
  Philadelphia, PA 19104
  cell phone 215-356-7266
  office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
  office fax 215-222-1101


  **
  AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at http://www.aol.com. 

Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted

[Jedidiah McKee]

If in fact David was confusing Cedar Park and Clark
Park, I've forwarded him enough info (and pics) to
clarify.  (I'm not actually sure where he got my
email, but I suspect it had to do with my Clark Park
Fest volunteer recruitment activities.)
Thanks all for responding so quickly.
Jed.
--- Vincent/Roger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I think that the artist, David Guinn, is looking for
 a wide range of ideas.  He asked me if we had some
 photos of the Cedar Park Fair.  It is also possible
 that there's a confusion about Cedar Park and
 Clark Park, and of course this is not the first
 time people have confused the two.  
 Roger Harman  
   - Original Message - 
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; univcity@list.purple.com 
   Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 11:35 AM
   Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted
 
 
 
   In a message dated 3/4/07 12:24:22 AM,
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 
 
 A mural artist has been contracted to depict a
 scene
 of a Clark Park festival.  (Mural to go on the
 4700
 block of Baltimore.)  He approached me for
 pictures to
 look at for inspiration.  I pointed him to Sean
 Dorn,
 who's been hard to get ahold of lately.
 
 If anyone has pictures of past Festivals
 (particularly
 in virtual form) that might be helpful in this
 regard,
 please forward them (or a link) to me before
 midweek
 (March 6th or so), and I will pass them along to
 the
 artist. 
 
 Thanks,
 Jed.
 
 
   Jed, thanks for posting this information.
 
   I'm wondering why a mural in the Cedar Park
 neighborhood, at 47th  Baltimore, would depict
 festivities in the Spruce Hill neighborhood's CLARK
 Park, rather than fairs in the Cedar Park
 neighborhood's CEDAR Park.  Are you sure that is the
 plan?  Who made that decision?  It strikes me as
 pretty odd.
 
   Melani Lamond
 
 
 
 
   Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
   Urban  Bye, Realtor
   3529 Lancaster Ave.
   Philadelphia, PA 19104
   cell phone 215-356-7266
   office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
   office fax 215-222-1101
 
 
   **
   AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out
 more about what's free from AOL at
 http://www.aol.com. 



 

The fish are biting. 
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php

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: Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted

[Jedidiah McKee]

hey,
just wanted to make sure that everybody got this. 
If anyone wants to be a good Samaritan and forward
this to [Announce] and [Culture], please be my guest. 
I'm getting a little tired of playing with the
buttons...
J.
Note: forwarded message attached.



 

Have a burning question?  
Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.---BeginMessage---

Hi All,

I asked Jed for pictures of the clark park festival because I wanted  
to get pictures of groups of people outdoors to use in a general way  
as references for figures in the mural. I thought that there might be  
some interesting pictures of people in different poses to spur my  
imagination for how people could be posed in the mural.


I would very much like to look at pictures of events in Cedar Park.   
I have taken pictures of Cedar Park myself for the mural,  as well as  
looked at pictures on the Cedar Park Neighbors website.  If you have  
pictures of events in Cedar park I would really like to look at them.  
You can email some to me or I would be happy to come to you to meet  
in person.


While Clark Park is not within the boundaries of Cedar Park, I felt  
that many Cedar Park residents use Clark Park and that it is part of  
the story of the neighborhood as well.  Please let me know what you  
think. There are two big walls and I want to be thorough in capturing  
a portrait of people's lives in the area around 47th and Baltimore.


I really want to do a good job that you will all be happy with for  
these murals. please contact me with any ideas or concerns.


David


David Guinn
601 N. 18th St.
Philadelphia, PA  19130
215 704 4955
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



On Mar 4, 2007, at 11:05 PM, Jedidiah McKee wrote:


I'm quite aware of the difference between Cedar Park
and Clark Park.  *Apparently* the mural artist is not
(I've Bcc'd him this message).  He approached me for
pics of Clark Park Festivals, but later mentioned
Cedar Park Neighbors being the primary community
organization he was networking with.  (perhaps he
responded to one of my announcements recruiting
volunteers for the Clark Park Festivals, and just
confused the two).

I will be forwarding the pics of *Cedar Park* Fairs
that some-one else sent me shortly.  It may not go
through my Sidek!ck, so I may need to send it sometime
tomorrow when I have access to a public computer.

Jed.

--- Josh Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Yes, if you need any pictures of the Cedar Park
Fair, Jed, I have a bunch, some of which I took and
some of which come from Cedar Park resident Judy
Lamirand, all in digital form. Let me know.

--Josh

- Original Message 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2007 3:14:27 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival pics wanted




Dear Jed:



Meaning no disrespect,  but a mural for 47th and
Baltimore, should reflect CEDAR PARK and

not Clark Park.  I am sure you have your parks
confused.



The mural for 47th and Baltimore would include Cedar
Park and not Clark Park. Cedar Park is within

the boundaries of this much anticipated mural.
Cedar Park Boundaries are 46-52nd - Larchwood to
Kingsessing. I was at the mural meeting for 47th and
Baltimore and Clark Park's name was never mentioned.



We have our Cedar Park Fair, which we have plenty
pictures for you to use and get inspiration from.

I am copying our Vice President, Maureen Tate, (who
has pictures) and board member Josh Schneider who
also has pictures for you to use for inspiration.



We also have pictures from our Jazz Series in front
of Cedar Park.  Although Clark Park is our neighbor,

and it is a beautiful park, we on this end are very
proud of our new and improved Cedar Park and would

like that to be the only park featured, as far as
parks go in these two murals, one by Benny the
Barber and the other by the A-Space wall.  Should
you need any additional information, I would be very
glad to assist you in any way.



Carol Walker, President

CEDAR PARK NEIGHBORS

cell   267-575-3606



AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out
more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.



**
 AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out
more about what's free from AOL at
http://www.aol.com.










__ 
__

Be a PS3 game guru.
Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at  
Yahoo! Games.

http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121


---End Message---

Re: [UC] Clark Park Jan 18 Meeting: Video Now Available

[Brian Siano]

Bill Sanderson wrote:


Absolutely brilliant--Listening to it now.  Would love to be able to see the
slides--are they at the web site?

They are now. Browse to http://www.clarkpark.info, and select the Park 
A page.


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Jan 18 Meeting: Video Now Available

[Ross Bender]

Brilliant! I will probably never have the time or inclination to attend an
FOCP meeting, but this was great! I felt like I was right there in the
audience. Could have used a little more sex and violence, but otherwise, hey
-- great entertainment!

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/doggies.html

On 1/19/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=290773440076348476hl=en

Our membership meeting this past Wednesday offered a lot of novel and
interesting things. One of them was an idea of mine: rather than
frantically type out the meeting minutes and try to summarize the
meeting for everyone, I decided to try to videotape the meeting and load
it onto Google Video. This would offer a lot of benefits. A record of
the event would be far more accurate than a summary. People who could
not attend the meeting could at least watch it. And, depending on the
technical issues, we may even have a faster turnaround time.

Well, _mirable dictu_, the turnaround time was less than two days this
time. Google Video's just finished processing the nearly-hour-long video
of the second part of the meeting, regarding the Park A reconstruction.
(The first part, about the Party for the Park, will be coming soon.)

Note. This is NOT an especially well-done video. It's all handheld, with
a lot of whipping around to aim the mike at the speaker. And there are a
few glitches. (I'm thinking of borrowing a second camera for future
meetings.) But, for everybody who didn't make it to the meeting, the
video is available at:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=290773440076348476hl=en

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.

RE: [UC] Clark Park Jan 18 Meeting: Video Now Available

[Bill Sanderson]

Absolutely brilliant--Listening to it now.  Would love to be able to see the
slides--are they at the web site?



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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Jan 18 Meeting: Video Now Available

[Brian Siano]

Bill Sanderson wrote:


Absolutely brilliant--Listening to it now.  Would love to be able to see the
slides--are they at the web site?

They will be. 
 





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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park, Baltimore Ave, Stolen History, UCD, etc

[Mosetter]

Isn't this part of Jannie Blackwells area of responsibility ?
You folks elected her!   It's time for a change before she gives up 
the rest of the hood to Penn 

In a message dated 4/20/2005 8:14:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I must admit when I was at the park I too was surprised by the amount of 
  trash and debris.  I though, clearly this is from the good weather and the 
  increased number of visitors . . . that was last week.  Unfortunately, I 
  have to admit, it hasn't improved - there are overflowing cans, trash 
  lying about . . .
  
  As I walked home from work, I noticed that the Satterlee hospital sign was 
  missing.  You know the one that tells you of the significance of the 
  immediate area to our national history?  It looked like it was uprooted. 
  I emailed some local historians to see if they knew if it was being 
  repaired or if it had been stolen, and they seem to think it was stolen (I 
  think I was the first person to bring it to anyones attention - mainly 
  because I know most of the dead from there that are buried in 
  http://mountmoriahcemetery.org (shameless plug)).
  
  So as I rode my bike today down Baltimore Ave, I again couldn't help 
  notice that Damn, Baltimore Ave Corridor is looking pretty trashy!  The 
  cans were overflowing, trash was everywhere - man, I can't even begin to 
  tell you how bad it was at the corner of 45th  Baltimore.  I think 
  someone dropped off their home refuse right there.
  
  A passing thought - which I can neither confirm nor deny - was that the 
  UCD must be boycotting this area, demonstrating that their services are 
  valuable and needed here, since as you can tell, the storeowners do not 
  maintain their storefronts.  I do have to confess, however, that I am 
  still bitter about the UCD security patrol dude who came racing down 
  Baltimore on the sidewalk and almost ran me over.  When I confronted him, 
  telling him it was illegal to ride on the sidewalk and also dangerous, he 
  kindly informed me that (and I quote) I am authorized to ride wherever 
  I want.  Heh heh - sure you are.  Or is he?
  
  Maybe it's just me, or maybe it's the weather, but something seems amiss 
  on Baltimore Ave these days . . . anyone else notice any of this?
  
  bewildered,
  
  John

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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park, Baltimore Ave, Stolen History, UCD, etc

[bgandersen]

I voted for [EMAIL PROTECTED].-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: univcity@list.purple.comSent: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 06:19:29 EDTSubject: Re: [UC] Clark Park, Baltimore Ave, Stolen History, UCD, etc 


Isn't this part of Jannie Blackwells area of responsibility ?
You folks elected her!   It's time for a change before she gives up 
the rest of the hood to Penn 

In a message dated 4/20/2005 8:14:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I must admit when I was at the park I too was surprised by the amount of 
  trash and debris.  I though, clearly this is from the good weather and the 
  increased number of visitors . . . that was last week.  Unfortunately, I 
  have to admit, it hasn't improved - there are overflowing cans, trash 
  lying about . . .
  
  As I walked home from work, I noticed that the Satterlee hospital sign was 
  missing.  You know the one that tells you of the significance of the 
  immediate area to our national history?  It looked like it was uprooted. 
  I emailed some local historians to see if they knew if it was being 
  repaired or if it had been stolen, and they seem to think it was stolen (I 
  think I was the first person to bring it to anyones attention - mainly 
  because I know most of the dead from there that are buried in 
  http://mountmoriahcemetery.org (shameless plug)).
  
  So as I rode my bike today down Baltimore Ave, I again couldn't help 
  notice that Damn, Baltimore Ave Corridor is looking pretty trashy!  The 
  cans were overflowing, trash was everywhere - man, I can't even begin to 
  tell you how bad it was at the corner of 45th  Baltimore.  I think 
  someone dropped off their home refuse right there.
  
  A passing thought - which I can neither confirm nor deny - was that the 
  UCD must be boycotting this area, demonstrating that their services are 
  valuable and needed here, since as you can tell, the storeowners do not 
  maintain their storefronts.  I do have to confess, however, that I am 
  still bitter about the UCD security patrol dude who came racing down 
  Baltimore on the sidewalk and almost ran me over.  When I confronted him, 
  telling him it was illegal to ride on the sidewalk and also dangerous, he 
  kindly informed me that (and I quote) "I am authorized to ride wherever 
  I want".  Heh heh - sure you are.  Or is he?
  
  Maybe it's just me, or maybe it's the weather, but something seems amiss 
  on Baltimore Ave these days . . . anyone else notice any of this?
  
  bewildered,
  
  John

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.

RE: [UC] Clark Park, Baltimore Ave, Stolen History, UCD, etc

[Karen Heenan]

I think the state of the neighborhood after this weekend - including 
Baltimore Avenue and the park - is one more thing we can blame on Penn - 
wasn't it Hay Day or whatever they call it?  There was much festivity going 
on around Walnut Street, and I saw roaming bands of college kids in silly 
hats heading toward the the park in the afternoon, strewing beer cans in 
their wake. The little darlings.

I may not live on Kyle's block, but I'm near Abyssinia and the Watutsi Pub, 
so I'm used to cleaning up bottles in my front yard.  For some reason, 
though, it really irks me when the Penn kids treat the neighborhood as their 
personal dumping ground.  I think I'm just getting cranky.


I must admit when I was at the park I too was surprised by the amount of 
trash and debris.  I though, clearly this is from the good weather and the 
increased number of visitors . . . that was last week.  Unfortunately, I 
have to admit, it hasn't improved - there are overflowing cans, trash lying 
about . . .


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park, Baltimore Ave, Stolen History, UCD, etc

[L a s e r B e a m ®]

John Ellingsworth wrote:
Maybe it's just me, or maybe it's the weather, but something seems amiss 
on Baltimore Ave these days . . . anyone else notice any of this?

daffodil, john?

.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]




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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park festival in park A

[Craigsolve]

In a message dated 9/24/2004 7:11:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the 
  relatively few people who are privileged to live by the park and enjoy its 
  beauty every day should be willing to put up with a twice-yearly event which 
  is enjoyed by many in the community.

The nature of real 
estate and its zoning should be apparent to anyone who is responsible enough to 
have legally earned money and responsible enough to knowledgeably enter into a 
contract to spend it.

If I buy a house 
across the street from a playground, recreation center, or busy community park, 
why would I expect all such activity to conform immediately tomy limited 
concept of peaceful enjoyment of real estate?

Let me make this 
simple. If I buy a house across the street from a basketball court, I expect to 
see and hear a lot of basketball, even if I do not play. If the home owners 
believe they are damagedby nonapparent infrequent yet regular park 
activities of which they were not informed by the seller or the procuring cause 
real estate agents, let the buyer go to court to sue for damages. (Leave Liz 
alone for a few more weeks.)

For long term owners, 
the customs practiced by local society morph over time with the changing 
cultural milieu. Isn't the exposure to outsiders a reason one associates with an 
internationally renowned university?
our 
  elite civic clubs

While at times I enjoy 
engaging in name calling, I do it with the knowledge of its position damaging 
effect in social discourse.

Good luck in your 
crusade for openness and accessibility at Clark 
Park!.


Craig MelidosianRealSolutions NetworkP O Box 33355Phila 
PA 19142-0555215-724-8148 24hr voice/fax215-724-3212 
voiceBreakthrough RelationshipsEnhancing Value in Community  
GovernmentCopyright ©1998-2004

Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival

[Brian Siano]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In order for you to understand my comments, you have to have read the 
entire dialogue. Since perhaps you didn't, what you read is out of 
context.
Re context: You may not be aware of this, but when replying to a 
message, many newsreaders allow you to include the text to which you are 
replying. For example, in this message, your text appears above, 
preceded with  symbols to indicate that it's a quote. One can also edit 
the original comments down for brevity. You have probably seen this in 
previous messages on this list. Practices such as these preserve the 
context of the message, and help readers to follow the chain of discussion.

This can be very important. For example, when I receive an email that 
merely says IDIOT! You just don't get it, do you? without any context, 
I'm likely to assume that the note was from a demented, hysterical 
doofus who felt a need to spam me with random, Tourette's-like screamings.

I also disagree with your */_assumptions _/*about marijuana, since  I 
do have some medical background.
I have a medical background too. I've been a patient. (Not about 
marijuana, however. Broken arms.)


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.

Re: [UC] Clark Park Festival

[Brian Siano]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Polluted air, very hard on anyone with respiratory problems, such as 
asthma!
Last I checked, this was _not_ the fault of a one-day music and arts 
festival.

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.