Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ALPA_Forum] Re: SB 375 Conference - notes

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey Rensch
    Steve and Steve - This is one for us all to discuss face to face at a meeting. Somehow email isn t giving the discussion the depth and context it needs. I
    Message 1 of 7 , Mar 4, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Steve and Steve - This is one for us all to discuss face to face at a meeting.  Somehow email isn't giving the discussion the depth and context it needs.  I value both of you very highly and hope we discuss all of this in person where the nuances can come out.


      On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:05 PM, <slevy@...> wrote:



      You are completely out of your element here. It is as if I were giving technical advice on density, urban planning and global warming.


      I have tried several times to give you a polite heads up that you are in over your head. I asked a technical question and you responded with some kind of ad hominem political comments.


      That “fear of their jobs” rant is insulting to staff and pure speculation as is “paid by Exxon”. You are beginning to sound like the hateful people on Town Square.


      If this is the way ALPA members want to be represented, I am happy to step aside.


      ALPA members, please let me know.



      From: ALPA_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ALPA_Forum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of steveraneyc21
      Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 5:07 PM

      To: ALPA_Forum@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [ALPA_Forum] Re: SB 375 Conference - notes


      Steve L,

      It's very hard to speak for PA staff, especially when they work in fear
      of their jobs. That being said, few planning staffers with college
      degrees are not "progressive" - it's hard to argue against smart growth
      unless you're paid by Exxon to do so (Reason Foundation & Cato
      Institute). I'd characterize staff as quiet and neutral with whiffs of

      School board member Melissa Baten-Caswell (MBC) showed a willingness to
      problem solve. She thought about the impact of new housing that
      generates students and, thinking of the elementary schools with the most
      capacity, suggested that it was less worse to put student-generating
      houisng on Cal Ave compared to Univ Ave. I'd characterize MBC as
      open-minded and not rabidly opposed.

      Maybe there's some reason for optimism. There's no overt move to scuttle
      the housing element.

      - Steve R

      --- In ALPA_Forum@yahoogroups.com, <slevy@...> wrote:
      > Steve,
      > You have pushed the case that housing can pay fiscally in PA.

      > Do you know what the position of city or school staff is? It seems a
      > case to convince anyone of unless staff is either neutral or
      > Steve

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.