- Council Committee Passed the Freeze
- Carol Campbell Passes Away
- My first trip to the public library
- Fight digital exclusion
- What if half of Philadelphia didn't have roads?
- You know, let's not even worry about the City Commissioners office messing up voter registration processing
- Bold ideas to fix the budget
- Mayor Nutter's Town Hall Meeting Schedule
- City Releases Library Information to City Council
- Size of Philadelphia government?
Report from the Rules Committee Hearing
Submitted by Gaetano P. on Wed, 06/13/2007 - 10:56am.
As you may be aware, Lame Duck SOB Ramos introduced CED legislation to enable the Sugarhouse casino to be built. In addition, Councilman DiCicco introduced legislation to prohibit casinos from being built within 1,500 ft of a home, school or residence. These bills are being heard today in the Rules Committee.
This morning was quite contentious, the Building Trades were there being rowdy, but the residents, community activists and, essentially those who do not want their neighborhoods destroyed by irresponsible development were louder. There were more of us--many more.
When Councilman DiCicco walked into the room, the community people cheered and chanted his name. Frank got a standing ovation. We may not have always agreed with him, but he has been very good on this issue since the sighting decisions have been made. We appreciate his hard work.
When Ramos walked into the room, he was treated with jeers and hisses, and some people even cussed at him. Frankly, in my own humble opinion--it was deserved.
President Verna, however, quickly got the room in order for the start of the hearing.
I just got back to my office, I had to attend to something at work before I go back. But, the Rules Committee already made one good decision, they will not vote Ramos's bills out of committee until the end of the summer break! That is great. Unfortunately, the same with the DiCicco bills. But, we need time. Time is our ally.
I, again, want to thank the Philadelphia delegation to the General Assembly for putting peoples jobs, homes, children, families and communities at risk. You all showed great courage in your vote for Act 71, in the middle of the night before summer recess. Honestly, I do not know what I would do with all the free time I would have if I weren't working so hard to ensure that the place I love most, South Philly and Philadelphia, more generally, is not irreperably damaged by your negligence. I know some of you do not represent any of the river wards--so why should you care about the hell we are going through. Again, thanks.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
So, any chance someone asked
So, any chance someone asked Ramos to put forth the zoning legislation to be able to relocate the Youth Study Center to West Philly since Janie Blackwell is having a blast sitting on it and holding up the Barnes Museum?
I mean, if he is going to break Councilmanic privilege, he should do it all around to some more significant benefit.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Since you were there
Since you were there yesterday and you are a S.Philly ... what are your thoughts on this?
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20070613__500M_complex_eyed_for_S_...
I would think this is something the area should completely embrace and I can not believe any large amount of people are fighting it.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
What's So Hard to Believe?
I am trying to understand what is difficult to understand about a community not wanting a $500M complex on their doorsteps. It is not fair to portray community activists as anti-development; they are merely seeking something more in line with the character of their neighborhood. DiCicco, as quoted in the article, seems to feel that these sentiments are what have kept this tradt vacant, but if that lot should sit vacant, that is not the fault of the community, but of the developers. Haven't we had enough development-at-any-cost in this city?
Broad and Washington isn't
Broad and Washington isn't exactly on "people's doorstep". It is a 4 lane by 4 lane high traffic intersection.
With all the vacant lots and falling down buildings, I don't think the city has a "development at any cost" mentality. Far from it. It still seems pretty regressive in that regards.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
What's So Hard to Believe?
I am trying to understand what is difficult to understand about a community not wanting a $500M complex on their doorsteps. It is not fair to portray community activists as anti-development; they are merely seeking something more in line with the character of their neighborhood. DiCicco, as quoted in the article, seems to feel that these sentiments are what have kept this tradt vacant, but if that lot should sit vacant, that is not the fault of the community, but of the developers. Haven't we had enough development-at-any-cost in this city?
Re: Barnes Foundation Move
It is not a done deal.
blog entry concerning Barnes Foundation move if you're interested in my take of the situation.
http://autoacne.blogspot.com/2007/06/food-stuff-consumption-and-miscella...
Supreme Court Ruling
Thank you for the report on today's hearing. However, can you explain how this relates to the Foxwoods' appeal currently before the State Supreme Court? I am trying to understand the connection but failing miserably.