Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
THE PALISADES cOMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOARD HAVE BEEN THE MAJOR FORCE PUSHING FOR THE BUILDING OF THE FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK. EVEN AFTER DCPS PURCHASED GDS ONE BLOCK AWAY. THEIR 10+ ACRE PARK? SACRED! WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SEEN THEIR REACTION IF THE SCHOOL WAS TO BE BUILT ON THEIR PARK.....
Again, WHY ARE YOU YELLING?
If the Palisades Rec Center is "their" park then Hardy is too, both are within the boundaries of the PCA.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mary Cheh is the one pushing this over the objections of the neighborhood. She lost my vote.
All of the neighborhood's representatives bar one supported it. The neighborhood is not the board of FCCA or a few outspoken residents of the FVHD.
THE "NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES" REFERS TO ANC3D COMMINSIONERS.
THEY ARE STRONDLY ALLIGNED WITH THE KEEP OLE HARDY PUBLIC GROUP .
THEY NEVER INCLUDED THE ISSUE OF BUILDING FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK AS AN AGENDA ITEM UNTIL JUNE 2, 2021 [WHEN THE CITY CONSIDERED THE FOXHALL SCHOOL AND THE MACARTHUR SCHOOLS A 'DONE DEAL'
https://www.anc3d.org/2021-meetings
THIS MEANS THAT THESE COMMISSIONERS WOULD NOT HAVE ALERTED THIER CONSTIUENTS [WARD 3D RESIDENTS] ABOUT THE TWO SCHOOLS. HOW ARE RESIDENTS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE INPUT IF THEIR ANC REPS DON'T GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY.
THE ANC3D COMMISIONERS WERE IN DERILICTION OF THEIR DUTY. SHAME ON THEM
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mary Cheh is the one pushing this over the objections of the neighborhood. She lost my vote.
All of the neighborhood's representatives bar one supported it. The neighborhood is not the board of FCCA or a few outspoken residents of the FVHD.
THE "NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES" REFERS TO ANC3D COMMINSIONERS.
THEY ARE STRONDLY ALLIGNED WITH THE KEEP OLE HARDY PUBLIC GROUP .
THEY NEVER INCLUDED THE ISSUE OF BUILDING FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK AS AN AGENDA ITEM UNTIL JUNE 2, 2021 [WHEN THE CITY CONSIDERED THE FOXHALL SCHOOL AND THE MACARTHUR SCHOOLS A 'DONE DEAL'
https://www.anc3d.org/2021-meetings
THIS MEANS THAT THESE COMMISSIONERS WOULD NOT HAVE ALERTED THIER CONSTIUENTS [WARD 3D RESIDENTS] ABOUT THE TWO SCHOOLS. HOW ARE RESIDENTS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE INPUT IF THEIR ANC REPS DON'T GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY.
THE ANC3D COMMISIONERS WERE IN DERILICTION OF THEIR DUTY. SHAME ON THEM
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mary Cheh is the one pushing this over the objections of the neighborhood. She lost my vote.
All of the neighborhood's representatives bar one supported it. The neighborhood is not the board of FCCA or a few outspoken residents of the FVHD.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
THE PALISADES cOMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOARD HAVE BEEN THE MAJOR FORCE PUSHING FOR THE BUILDING OF THE FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK. EVEN AFTER DCPS PURCHASED GDS ONE BLOCK AWAY. THEIR 10+ ACRE PARK? SACRED! WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SEEN THEIR REACTION IF THE SCHOOL WAS TO BE BUILT ON THEIR PARK.....
Again, WHY ARE YOU YELLING?
To the Foxhallers, the public policy implications don't matter, whether something is a good idea or not is irrelevant. It's all about power and control.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
THE PALISADES cOMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOARD HAVE BEEN THE MAJOR FORCE PUSHING FOR THE BUILDING OF THE FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK. EVEN AFTER DCPS PURCHASED GDS ONE BLOCK AWAY. THEIR 10+ ACRE PARK? SACRED! WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SEEN THEIR REACTION IF THE SCHOOL WAS TO BE BUILT ON THEIR PARK.....
Again, WHY ARE YOU YELLING?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
THE PALISADES cOMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOARD HAVE BEEN THE MAJOR FORCE PUSHING FOR THE BUILDING OF THE FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK. EVEN AFTER DCPS PURCHASED GDS ONE BLOCK AWAY. THEIR 10+ ACRE PARK? SACRED! WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SEEN THEIR REACTION IF THE SCHOOL WAS TO BE BUILT ON THEIR PARK.....
Again, WHY ARE YOU YELLING?
Anonymous wrote:
THE PALISADES cOMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOARD HAVE BEEN THE MAJOR FORCE PUSHING FOR THE BUILDING OF THE FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK. EVEN AFTER DCPS PURCHASED GDS ONE BLOCK AWAY. THEIR 10+ ACRE PARK? SACRED! WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SEEN THEIR REACTION IF THE SCHOOL WAS TO BE BUILT ON THEIR PARK.....
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This means that the 550-student campus will be built on our relatively small park (Hardy Park and Rec Center).
It's not your park.
So I read that whole thing, and I can't tell what the point was. Certainly there was no "aha" moment where I thought, "hmm, she's got a point, I never thought of that..."
So once again, arguments that seem powerful to Foxhallers are completely unpersuasive to normal people. [/quote
OBJECTING TO SOMEONE REFERRING TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AS "OUR" PARK . CHECK OUT THIS PALISADES LISTSERV POST---PRIORITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO PALISADES KIDS!!!! THE HYPOCRISY OF THE ATTACKERS IS UNBELIEVABLE!!!! WHY ARE YOU YELLING?
PCA General Membership Meeting Tonight!
________________________________________
Anne Ourand 06/04/13 #22796
Don't miss the PCA General Membership meeting tonight (Tuesday, June 4th) at 7:30pm at the Palisades Rec Center -- the last one until October!
The agenda is chock full of interesting items!
**Nick Keenan will be presenting a resolution concerning field usage:
At both the Palisades and Hardy fields: At times when there are multiple groups interested in the same time, priority should be given to groups which serve significant numbers of Palisades residents.
When two or more groups that serve significant numbers of Palisades residents are interested in the same time, time should be proportioned with regard for the relative number of Palisades residents served.
**Jerry Price, CEO of Sibley, will be introducing the new president, Chip Davis. They will give us an update on current projects.
** Ted McCormick, the new manager of our Safeway, will be there to introduce himself (we will not be discussing future plans).
**Andy Otteman from DOE will be giving a presentation on RiverSmart Homes.
This meeting will be interesting, so please come!
Anne Ourand
PCA Administrator
THE PALISADES cOMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOARD HAVE BEEN THE MAJOR FORCE PUSHING FOR THE BUILDING OF THE FOXHALL SCHOOL ON HARDY PARK. EVEN AFTER DCPS PURCHASED GDS ONE BLOCK AWAY. THEIR 10+ ACRE PARK? SACRED! WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SEEN THEIR REACTION IF THE SCHOOL WAS TO BE BUILT ON THEIR PARK.....
Palisades@groups.io Topics Palisades Amphitheater – A Restoration Vision
Date 1 - 1 of 1 previous pagenext page
Palisades Amphitheater – A Restoration Vision
Avi GreenNov 15 #67889
Hi Neighbors,
On the agenda at tomorrow's PCA Town Hall is a presentation about the potential restoration of the Palisades Amphitheater at the Rec Center site. Local architect, Don Gregory (the architect for the library and rec center renovations), has developed a design vision for a future project. Don will be presenting this design vision at the Town Hall tomorrow. If supported by the community, we will seek the backing of the City to make this restoration goal a reality. Special thanks to the Palisades Community Fund for providing the seed funding to advance this intriguing idea!
Avi Green
Sherier Place
Please tune in!
Tricia Duncan
PCA President
Topic: PCA Town Hall
Time: Nov 16, 2021 07:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82420312409?pwd=SVBPNjRnY1oycEJTejd4TjN0QVJvUT09
Meeting ID: 824 2031 2409
Passcode: 52588
One tap mobile
+13126266799,,82420312409# US (Chicago)
+19292056099,,82420312409# US (New York)
Dial by your location
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
Meeting ID: 824 2031 2409
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kbfbyqFy3x
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's funny how things come full circle. The PCA resolution cited above came about because Lab School was reserving both Palisades and Hardy Monday through Friday until dark for their athletics. They didn't actually need the time -- they only used about a quarter of it -- but they wanted to keep anyone else from using the parks so they would be "theirs." DPR granted them the permits in blatant violation of their own rules -- priority is supposed to be given to organizations that primarily serve DC residents, which Lab doesn't -- but apparently they were able to lean on the city government enough.
The resolution was poorly worded -- they should have been simply calling on DPR to follow their own rules. But the PCA was looking out for the interest of neighborhood residents. As I recall the FCCA backed the Lab School in this controversy.
Documentation? Or just continued FCCA Bashing?
I remember going to public meetings at the time where FCCA members said they preferred the Lab arrangement because it meant the field sat empty much of the time. I remember thinking what a bunch of selfish assholes.
No reason to believe you. So many of the comments on this thread are obviously Ass$&@@! Bent on attacking a community . Recordings? Besides the listening session where the well-known neighbor (who defaced the signs) ranted about the neighborhood being racist?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's funny how things come full circle. The PCA resolution cited above came about because Lab School was reserving both Palisades and Hardy Monday through Friday until dark for their athletics. They didn't actually need the time -- they only used about a quarter of it -- but they wanted to keep anyone else from using the parks so they would be "theirs." DPR granted them the permits in blatant violation of their own rules -- priority is supposed to be given to organizations that primarily serve DC residents, which Lab doesn't -- but apparently they were able to lean on the city government enough.
The resolution was poorly worded -- they should have been simply calling on DPR to follow their own rules. But the PCA was looking out for the interest of neighborhood residents. As I recall the FCCA backed the Lab School in this controversy.
Documentation? Or just continued FCCA Bashing?
I remember going to public meetings at the time where FCCA members said they preferred the Lab arrangement because it meant the field sat empty much of the time. I remember thinking what a bunch of selfish assholes.
No reason to believe you. So many of the comments on this thread are obviously Ass$&@@! Bent on attacking a community . Recordings? Besides the listening session where the well-known neighbor (who defaced the signs) ranted about the neighborhood being racist?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's funny how things come full circle. The PCA resolution cited above came about because Lab School was reserving both Palisades and Hardy Monday through Friday until dark for their athletics. They didn't actually need the time -- they only used about a quarter of it -- but they wanted to keep anyone else from using the parks so they would be "theirs." DPR granted them the permits in blatant violation of their own rules -- priority is supposed to be given to organizations that primarily serve DC residents, which Lab doesn't -- but apparently they were able to lean on the city government enough.
The resolution was poorly worded -- they should have been simply calling on DPR to follow their own rules. But the PCA was looking out for the interest of neighborhood residents. As I recall the FCCA backed the Lab School in this controversy.
Documentation? Or just continued FCCA Bashing?
I remember going to public meetings at the time where FCCA members said they preferred the Lab arrangement because it meant the field sat empty much of the time. I remember thinking what a bunch of selfish assholes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This means that the 550-student campus will be built on our relatively small park (Hardy Park and Rec Center).
It's not your park.
So I read that whole thing, and I can't tell what the point was. Certainly there was no "aha" moment where I thought, "hmm, she's got a point, I never thought of that..."
So once again, arguments that seem powerful to Foxhallers are completely unpersuasive to normal people. [/quote
OBJECTING TO SOMEONE REFERRING TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AS "OUR" PARK . CHECK OUT THIS PALISADES LISTSERV POST---PRIORITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO PALISADES KIDS!!!! THE HYPOCRISY OF THE ATTACKERS IS UNBELIEVABLE!!!! WHY ARE YOU YELLING?
PCA General Membership Meeting Tonight!
________________________________________
Anne Ourand 06/04/13 #22796
Don't miss the PCA General Membership meeting tonight (Tuesday, June 4th) at 7:30pm at the Palisades Rec Center -- the last one until October!
The agenda is chock full of interesting items!
**Nick Keenan will be presenting a resolution concerning field usage:
At both the Palisades and Hardy fields: At times when there are multiple groups interested in the same time, priority should be given to groups which serve significant numbers of Palisades residents.
When two or more groups that serve significant numbers of Palisades residents are interested in the same time, time should be proportioned with regard for the relative number of Palisades residents served.
**Jerry Price, CEO of Sibley, will be introducing the new president, Chip Davis. They will give us an update on current projects.
** Ted McCormick, the new manager of our Safeway, will be there to introduce himself (we will not be discussing future plans).
**Andy Otteman from DOE will be giving a presentation on RiverSmart Homes.
This meeting will be interesting, so please come!
Anne Ourand
PCA Administrator
It's telling that you equate advocating for greater public use of a public asset to trying to restrict public use of public property. Because they're not the same thing at all.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's funny how things come full circle. The PCA resolution cited above came about because Lab School was reserving both Palisades and Hardy Monday through Friday until dark for their athletics. They didn't actually need the time -- they only used about a quarter of it -- but they wanted to keep anyone else from using the parks so they would be "theirs." DPR granted them the permits in blatant violation of their own rules -- priority is supposed to be given to organizations that primarily serve DC residents, which Lab doesn't -- but apparently they were able to lean on the city government enough.
The resolution was poorly worded -- they should have been simply calling on DPR to follow their own rules. But the PCA was looking out for the interest of neighborhood residents. As I recall the FCCA backed the Lab School in this controversy.
Documentation? Or just continued FCCA Bashing?