Could you explain this? I know the City Charter has a lot of odd things in it, but why would it lay out the economic levels of the city's neighborhoods?

Do you have the actual language from the city charter? I'd like to see that.

To Pete McPhillips:

Here's the info you requested, taken straight from Philadelphia's Home Rule Charter:

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
PHILADELPHIA HOME RULE CHARTER
Adopted by the Electors April 17, 1951

Article III.
EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE BRANCH -- ORGANIZATION
CHAPTER 1
Officers, Departments, Boards, Commissions and Other Agencies

Section 3-306
Citizenship and Residence
All officers and employees of the City shall be citizens of the United States. It shall not be necessary for the Managing Director, the Director of Finance, the Personnel Director, any appointed department head or any other employee not in the civil service to be a resident of the City at the time of his appointment but residence in the City must be acquired within six months thereafter. Appointed members of boards and commissions shall be residents of the City or of a county of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania adjacent to the City.

What also needs to be equally weighed is the implication of this not specified because it's simple common sense. When this provision was put in place it was specifically intended to protect the quality of life within Philadelphia from any sort of double-standardism between Philadelphia and the suburbs outside its boundaries, and with it understood that in order for the City to have high quality employees while requiring that they hold residence within the City at the same time, such Philadelphia-based residential communities must be of the highest possible standard. And since Northeast Philadelphia for the most part IS zoned RESIDENTIAL, than that's where any efforts to undermine it in any way are outside the bounds of what the Home Rule Charter allows for, and thus are 100% illegal. Which is why the developers of Independence Pointe cannot legally build whatever they wish to on that site or however they wish, the Fox Chase Cancer Center cannot legally expand onto neighboring Burholme Park thus compromising a beutiful community park in the process, the current owners of the historic Pennypack Theatre building cannot legally convert that building to be a low-income consumer oriented mini mall when market conditions support its being able to be restored to a theater and so on.

Ok Obviously we're geting lost in translation here. You wrote:

"According to the City Charter, Northeast Philly is supposed to be upscale residential"

I wanted to see where it said that. I knew all about the residency requirement. But nowhere in the city charter does it lay out the zoning of sections of the city nor does it designate the economic levels.
NorthEast Philly is what it is because of when it was built. The North Philly was 'upscale residential' in the early 1900s and is all rowhouses. When most of the NE was buitl after world war II, the style of development had changed, thus the more suburban look. But it has nothing to do with the city charter.

Actually the City Charter does have a great deal with the effort to make Northeast Philadelphia much more suburban like, but it did not put it into those specific words because it was such an obvious thing at the time. Prior to the Home Rule Charter's creation there had been a trend toward a type of double-standardism, that is to say, Philadelphia's leading movers and shakers taking up residency outside the city so as to not be subjected to the unfair policies they were imposing on the city's residents. That's essentially how the Main Line came into being. But many are starting to now rediscover that Northeast Philadelphia had been the city's original Man Line, as evidenced by Glen Foerd on the Delaware, Knowlton, the Ryerss estate and so on. And no matter what anyone tries to say, Northeast Philadelphia is every bit in its rights to become this again. See, this is not for anyone in other parts of the city -- most particularly Center City -- to decide, but is entirely up to Northeast Philadelphia itself to, and there's nothing in the City Home Rule Charter that disputes or prohibits this.

Too much these days decisions are being made for Northeast Philadelphia by those not of Northeast Philadelphia -- the very type of double-standardism that the Home Rule Charter intended to prevent. To give you some examples, the Fox Chase Cancer Center's proposal to expand onto neighboring Burholme Park. The chief proponant of this proposal is Dr. Young, the Cancer Center's head, who's not a resident of Northeast Philadelphia but of Chestnut Hill instead. And he's attempting to put on the Northeast Philadelphia communities surrounding Burholme Park what he clearly would not want put on his own Chestnut Hill community. Another good example, the designated developers of Holmesburg's Independence Pointe are not Northeast Philadelphia residents, but rather, hail from Bucks County. And let the record show that they regard it as "beneath their dignity" to discuss with and win the approval of Holmesburg before proceeding further. Next, we have decisions being made about the future of the Pennypack Theatre building at Welsh & Frankford, which is very historic, in blatent disregard to how Holmesburg and other Northeast Philadelphia residents feel about it. And the chief proponant behind this proposal is Stuart G. Rosenberg, an architect who resides in Center City. And all three of these wrongminded proposals are excellent examples of what the City Charter was created to prevent.

For if the City Charter is a living document, Northeast Philadelphia must be able to set its own terms as to what it's willing to accept and what it isn't. And if any in city government say no to this and side with those who are ill-intentioned instead, then it is they, and not Northeast Philadelphia's residents who resist them, who are in violation of the City Charter, and therefore they should gracefully -- or ungracefully if need be -- resign if they're unwilling to change their illegal stance.

Are you familiar at all with the legal term, "implied warranty"? "Implied warranty" is essentially that which is not stated in a contract, bill of sale and so on because it's so obvious. For many legal documents would not make any sense and would serve no purpose at all if not for that provision. And we know that in the City Charter it states that employees of Philadelphia government cannot reside outside Philadelphia. But the fact that it doesn't state specifically why does not mean that what isn't stated isn't covered by implied warranty. For without implied warranty, that specific law would make no sense at all. At the time the Home Rule Charter was created the implied warranty aspect of that law was obvious. And perhaps it's not so obvious now. But whether it is now or otherwise, changes nothing. For to most Northeast Philadelphia residents the implied warranty aspect of that law is obvious. And from what I can see, it's only those who are seeking to do a great deal of harm to Northeast Philadelphia for their own selfish gain, and who are not of Northeast Philadelphia, who are attempting to argue otherwise. And above I gave you three excellent examples.

A city charter is not something that is implied. Like any contract or document, "if it ain't in there, it ain't real" -- just as any military recruiter. Any promises, provisions, etc., all need to be spelled out. Nothing is "obvious," as when they approve the charters, there's a lot of debate about what is or is not included. You saying, "it was such an obvious thing at the time" is so easy -- and doesn't get you off the hook about the point you were trying to make. Interpretation and intent is decided by the courts, not individuals pushing their own agenda, especially about city charters, constitutions, and other such documents.

You made a lot of other accusations in your last posting, but no substantiation. Perhaps you'd like to provide sources for those accusations, especially the quotes. I am very curious now, especially about the quote of the Independence Pointe developers who you quoted as saying they don't have to, but let me quote you exactly:
And just a point: there is no record, as you say in "let the record show." You're not in court, not presenting an argument before a legal body, so this is but a discussion.

Your last comment, "And above I gave you three excellent examples" is nothing but a truly unsound, unfounded, unsourced, emotional argument. Please provide sources for your stuff.

__________________
PGP key: 0xB69AE59B
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| "When you choose your friends, don't get
| short-changed by choosing personality
| over character." ... - W. Somerset Maugham
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I would have to totally disagree with that. It's not my favorite neighborhood in the world, but it's doing well. The real eastate values are fine and I don't think it's one of the areas that's been hit hard by section 8. I don't get your obsession with Rhawnhurst.

I don't get his obsession with tryng to hijack every thread to be a "Fox Chase Cancer Center" thread. It's tiring.

__________________
PGP key: 0xB69AE59B
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| "When you choose your friends, don't get
| short-changed by choosing personality
| over character." ... - W. Somerset Maugham
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Just in case you missed it, a great article appeared in the City & Regional section of the Philadelphia Inquirer, Sunday, Nov 27 about the Norris Theatre in Norristown, PA. It was a case where this theater, designed by William Harold Lee -- the same architect who designed the Pennypack Theatre -- was demolished, and Norristown is really kicking itself over this! For in Saturday's Inquirer there was a great article about the tremendous success of the restored Bryn Mawr Theatre -- that theater, too, designed by William Harold Lee -- and from the looks of things, this architect was a Leonardo Da Vinci among 20th century architects, and this is only really starting to come to light now.

In other words, we who live in Holmesburg are truly blessed to have one of that architectural genius's masterpieces right here in our own midst, and we don't even know it, and hopefully we will before it's too late! For I'd say that building is essentially the Mona Lisa just waiting to be discovered.

And as for those of you who think a single-screen won't work there, you're totally unfamiliar with the powerful potential of digital cinema technology apparently -- which is understandable, since the closest digital cinema theater to Philadelphia right now is the United Artists Stadium 16 in King of Prussia. For digital changes everything. And since the Pennypack Theatre would have to have a whole new projection system put in if it gets restored as a theater, there's no question whatsover that the new projection system WILL be digital. And a single-screen theater with a digital cinema projection system will make the multiplexes look like Model Ts. And no, its restoration will not heavily rely on volunteerism. Whoever plays a part in making the Pennypack Theatre a theater once more, will get paid handsomely. We're talking big BIG bucks here, while the plan very much is to hire locally.

So you putting your money on the line to make it happen since you believe in it so strongly? I always believe in putting my money into things I believe in, forcing it into action.

__________________
PGP key: 0xB69AE59B
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| "When you choose your friends, don't get
| short-changed by choosing personality
| over character." ... - W. Somerset Maugham
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~