RE: [UC] Disclosure of relationships at hearings

[Glenn moyer]

"Yes, the newcomer real estate agent who was "outed" on the 50 condo deal first claimed he had no personal interest, but once he was outed he whined about how others got deals from Penn too! What was funny was that this man only moved to 46th and Osage in April of 2008.  He parachutes into this neighborhood from who-knows-where, gets a fat condo deal from Penn, and surprise! He supports the Penn project!  Who'd a thunk it! But there's no conflict of interest! It's like they say: Don't believe your lying eyes- believe me!"    I nearly burst with laughter when he said that projects like Campus Inn are the reason he moved to the neighborhood. To paraphrase; I'm not saying it was just this one, but projects like the Campus Inn are why my wife and i moved here-hahaha.  That's so pathetic. Wow, did you see the look in his eyes and hear his tone when he was outed as a fibber?  That dude scares me! Happy holidays, Glenn -----Original Message----- From: KAREN ALLEN Sent: Dec 23, 2008 5:33 PM To: UnivCity Listserv Subject: RE: [UC] Disclosure of relationships at hearings Yes, the newcomer real estate agent who was "outed" on the 50 condo deal first claimed he had no personal interest, but once he was outed he whined about how others got deals from Penn too! What was funny was that this man only moved to 46th and Osage in April of 2008.  He parachutes into this neighborhood from who-knows-where, gets a fat condo deal from Penn, and surprise! He supports the Penn project!  Who'd a thunk it! But there's no conflict of interest! It's like they say: Don't believe your lying eyes- believe me!   Another telling event was when SHCA President Ed Halligan testified that Spruce Hill's election meeting in November of 2007 featured a "public" presentation on the Campus Inn that was attended by "hundreds" of people. I testified immediately after him at the request of another opponent in order to offer testimony about that "public" meeting: that neither the election meeting notice nor the meeting agenda  specified that Lussenhop or the Campus Inn project would be discussed, and that there was no attempt whatsoever to reach out to non-members, thus suppressing the number of people who would have otherwise attended. Suddenly the Commission chairman didn't regard testimony about "public" meetings as being relevant.     But Listserv readers will recall that there was much discussion about Lussenhop appearing unannounced at other meetings such as First Thursday, Friends of 40th Street, and the University City Historical Society. The strategy there was to for Lussenhop to be able to claim that he was engaging the community, when in reality he and his supporters were suppressing potential opposition by shutting out those who do not participate in such meetings.   The only truly "public" meeting  was the Zoning Committee meeting that was first slated to be held in the too-small Spruce Hill office. Spruce Hill was forced to move the meeting to 42nd and Baltimore by accusations that they were deliberately using a location with limited space. Once it was moved, the meeting was publicized by Campus Inn opponents who created the "Hotel in Our Hood?" fliers and taped them to utility poles. The large crowd that turned out registered overwhelming oppositon to Campus Inn.   But during his testimony, Halligan also claimed that the community was evenly split about the project. The community was overwhelmingly opposed, but the Spruce Hill Zoning committee was split... I guess that counts as as "even".   > Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:56:22 -0500 > From: glen...@earthlink.net > To: univcity@list.purple.com > Subject: [UC] Disclosure of relationships at hearings > > > Some real estate people who testified at the recent PHC hearing in support of Campus Inn went out of their way to claim that they have no financial relationship with the development team. Then of course, they followed with the big lie, Penn's financial hardship song! > > One real estate person did so until another neighbor called out that he had recently been involved with the U. real estate on a deal of 50 condos. Only then did the one failing to disclose, admit it; saying something like, other agents got deals too. > > Of course, our neighbor telling the truth was the target of the wrath from the rubber stamping PHC, because the truth teller was “out of order.” > > > Another real estate person on UCD committees with Tom, (UCD is operated by Campus Apts and Penn Real Estate controlling the board); failed to disclose her or his relationships with the development team. That person even completed a private survey on this list to gather evidence of community support for UCD/Penn BID. That is actually strong connections with the entire development team. > > To me, this is like when Mr. Zitcer, the arts activist, forgot to tell the PW readers that he worked for Penn Real Estate when he was confused about why West Philly residents would protest the policies of Penn Real Estate. > > How can people forget these important details? Especially when they make a point of disclosing that they have no relationships which might interact with their testimony? > > > http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/heardinthehall/Is_it_Ethics_season_yet.html > > > Confused, > Glenn > > > > > > > > > > > ---- > 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 .