You have to fund it somehow, and if one of the goals is to cut the big doners out (and thereby their influence), you need to make up for some of that lost revenue. And we already heard that going door to door with hat in hand doesn't seem to work. If you tax everybody, then a) you get the money you need and b) you don't have Penn and Drexel calling the shots and c) it's beholden to it's funders -- us. I don't see another way to do it, (apart from roving vigilanti groups that issue smackdowns on people who don't clean up their own properties, which I could go with as well).
-----Original Message----- From: Turner,Kathleen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 3:16 PM To: Kyle Cassidy; Anthony West; UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: RE: [UC] Funding special services So this would be an organization that has the power to impose taxes? I believe that's what it's called when all property owners are required to pay towards something . . . Kathleen -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kyle Cassidy Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 3:13 PM To: Anthony West; UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: RE: [UC] Funding special services I think the only practical way to do it is divide the group's budget up among all the property owners in the area and have them (us) pay for it. It eliminates two of the problems that some people had with ucd which are: 1) uneven funding -- everybody would pay the same thing 2) representation -- the organization would be (as is UCD now) beholden to it's funders which in this case would be the people in the district. Everybody would get to vote on what services should be provided (you pay the tax, you get a vote). You'd just have to convince people that playing football without Penn's money is better because they have more control. ---- 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>.
