I am not saying anything different from your understanding. The petitions were supporting John. There would be no reason to have a petition if there wasn't an injustice in process. S -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Sanderson Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 8:00 PM To: 'S. Sharrieff Ali'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: RE: [UC] Public Record article & Community Associations I haven't read this whole thread, but when you cite a circulated petition as supporting some particular view, you should quote the petition itself. I don't know how many petitions there are circulating in the neighborhood at the moment, but I signed one, before that meeting-and the one I signed basically supported John Fenton-as a person and in the work that he does. It didn't in any way diss his employer, or complain about process. I had some misgivings about signing it because the person circulating it claimed that he had already been fired, which I believed then and still believe, is not a fact. However, I was quite willing to state my support for him and for the work that he does. There wasn't any wording that I recall the said anything broader about process or management, or, indeed, UCD at all. _____
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of S. Sharrieff Ali Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 10:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: RE: [UC] Public Record article & Community Associations I don't think the article gave a fair depiction of what really happened at the First Thursday Meeting. No offense to Tony, just my opinion. It was a combination of multiple statements from community residents at the meeting, 300 signatures on a petition delivered to Jannie Blackwell which she presented at the meeting (not mentioned in the article), along with Councilwoman Blackwell's statements which represented the full indictment of UCD and their polices. If you go back and review some of the first accounts from the news articles, there was a report of the "UCD's community service privileges being suspended" (we later learn it was by CCD, enter Paul Levy), which triggered the internal investigation by UCD. (not accurately reported in the Record) There was no mention of motions from the floor by residents or any community process being pursued by a committee in the Record article. I believe the Record article didn't properly frame the issue. The issue with UCD is the on-going management and polices of UCD, it just came to a with the John Fenton issue. Folks were upset with UCD and their handling of the Baltimore Avenue corridor. The fact there was a petition of signatures and multiple voices at the First Thursday meeting "joined" with Councilwoman Blackwell to question the transparency of the UCD government is a more accurate way of framing the debate. So Al, there is a strong community resident component to the complaint and process. S -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 8:25 AM To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] Public Record article & Community Associations Something interesting I found in the Public Record article about Special Services Districts. Here are a few quotes showing the element to which I refer (emphasis added): "divided neighbors and left community groups in the middle." "These services are highly valued by dozens of community groups that regularly tap them to address local needs" "regularly attended by activists from three dozen West Philadelphia groups and agencies" "In the middle are most community organizations" ... and yet ... "They derive their leadership and their sense of mission primarily from local business communities" The point that emerges from these quotes, which are central to the article and -- I believe -- to the issue involves the primacy of "community groups" as opposed to the actual stakeholders in the community. In this article, the stakeholders being businesses of some kind mainly because most of the special services districts in Philadelphia (although not elsewhere in the state or the country) are focused on business issues. And UCD's proposal tried to use this approach, too. By extension, this would apply to residents and other stakeholders in general in a more broad-based NID. This presupposes an intimate connection between the people in an area and the local "community group." A connection that I don't believe exists. For a lot of reasons... including the exclusionary attitudes that many "community groups" exhibit, and a misinterpretation among many "activists" who cast themselves as "community leaders" about what the essence of an urban/urbane lifestyle is. Al Krigman Slightly to the right of Jane Jacobs _____ See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .
