Tony just a note: WE HAVE NEVER HEARD FROM JOHN FENTON OR HIS STAFF ABOUT THEIR ACCOUNT OF WHAT HAPPENED THAT DAY.
Most of what we know to date is based on news articles which everyone knows are so accurate and of course we have the accounts of his boss who so quickly "threw John in front of the bus" to protect himself! The fact is, John did cooperate in the beginning, I don't know what happened later, maybe an attorney told him to stop talking or due to some unreasonable pressure by UCD, but something transpired to cause the negotiations to shut down and John to be perceived as "no longer" cooperating. S -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony West Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 10:24 PM To: University City List Subject: [UC] BIDs in the news Ray, That Fenton did not cooperate with the investigation is not a judgment on cooperativeness of his character, and I did not write: "Fenton is not a cooperative man," which would be a true ad hominem argument. It was just a statement of fact. He did not cooperate with this investigation. No one has disputed this claim with a conflicting account that alleges cooperation. He may have had wise, legitimate reasons for not cooperating. Knowing John much better than you do, I am sure he had good reasons. You write that my second article was "an attempt to legitimize BIDs by presenting them in a positive way." Quite the mind-reader, you are! BIDs don't need to be "legitimized"; they are creatures of law. I explained the process of successfully establishing a BID. To study that, one needs to look at a BID that has been successfully established. I was quite surprised, though, to discover how free of opposition the Mt. Airy BID had been. I did not "make a case" for it; that case had just been made, entirely without me. I pushed hard to look for dissenters, looked under the usual rocks, found none. So a fact emerges: some BID proposals are more popular than others. Make of this fact what you will. And read my third article, while you're at it. Get out of your parochial cubicle on Locust Walk and check out the rest of the city you live in. If you have a tip on a BID in the city that is experiencing significant opposition or dissent, please let me know. I was the first writer in the city to publish the opposition UCD ran into from Blackwell. I can hardly have any dependency on "UCD or its proposed BID." Its proposed BID specifically excludes me and has no relevance to any community activism I engage in, so I have publicly declined to take a stand on it. The company that pays me to report couldn't care less about UCD or Penn or FoCP or Ray Rorke; none of the above has ever been worth a plug nickel to us. We're interested in stories that shed light on citywide issues of governance, and local service districts in general are increasingly important players. Perhaps you find this bad news. Still, it's news you have a right to learn. -- Tony West > ucd's statement was: 'UCD has made numerous documented attempts to > contact John Fenton asking him to respond to the matter under > investigation. Our calls and letters have gone unanswered.' that's a > statement of fact. in your article, you state: 'fenton is not > cooperating with the investigation.' that's a judgement on your part > about fenton, not a statement of fact. there are any number of > legitimate reasons fenton might not have been able to communicate with > ucd, reasons that you might not have known about, reasons that had > nothing to do with cooperativeness. you might take more care, when > writing for public newpapers, to avoid the ad hominem. >> In that article, I wrote nothing at all about UCD's proposed BID, >> because it bears no relation at all to Fenton's activities or the >> subject of the story. UCD at this time is an SSD, not a BID. > your article was entitled "Blackwell Battles Penn Over Services > District: First in a Series." at the end of the article we learn that > it's the first in a series of articles about "how different > neighborhoods tackle the challenge of supplementing public services." > > your next article, "What's in a Bid? More Local Services or Just > Taxes?" makes the case for a 'winning bid' in mt. airy, and is an > attempt to legitimize bids by presenting them in a positive way. as > we all know, the legitimacy of ucd's proposed bid took a big hit when > the whole fenton affair blew up and blackwell publicly voiced her > alienation with ucd/penn. >> Yes, you, Ray Rorke, are befuddled. Q.E.D. > ergo: I can see clearly what you, tony west, cannot. how dependent > you've become upon ucd and its proposed bid, how that dependency is > tenaciously defended, how intimately it's wrapped up with your > personal need to control focp... > > [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>. ---- 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>.
