Continued support
To the Editor:
The Penn Women's Center and its many constituents are deeply appreciative of Friday's editorial and The Daily Pennsylvanian's news coverage of the opening of our 30th Anniversary Celebration. The DP has been an important recorder of the events and changes that have taken place in our three decades and contributes to a considerable archive that tells new generations our story.
Friday's article summed up a complex history and role with admirable conciseness, and I do want to clarify the relationship among my several remarks about the PWC's need for support. In mentioning the constraints on program funding, I did not mean to imply a lack of support by the Division of University Life, which under Vice Provost Valarie Swain-Cade McCoullum has shown extraordinary dedication to the survival and stability of the PWC. We benefit from her leadership along with the Greenfield Intercultural Center, La Casa Latina, LGBT Center, Makuu, PAACH and the other University Life departments, and through the collaborative process try to do more with less virtually every year.
Like many other units of the University that face stringency, the PWC is committed to doing all it can with all it has, while seeking external resources in an effort to do even more. The message I want convey is simply that in this 30th anniversary year we look not only to the past but to the future, anticipating and meeting new needs of the community we serve. Funding helps, and the lack of it hurts, but with our dedicated staff and volunteer corps, and the continued support of the Office of the VPUL, we look forward to doing that job.
Ellie DiLapi Director Penn Women's Center
Respect for walkers
To the Editor:
I write to remind the members of the Penn community that it is unlawful to ride bicycles on any sidewalk in the city of Philadelphia. In an effort to communicate this to the Penn community, the administration has posted "No Bicycle Riding" signs around campus, including on Locust Walk.
To continue to ride on Locust Walk displays arrogance and lack of community spirit. These riders do not deserve to be part of our community. They are, by their actions, saying "go to hell" to the rest of us. There is a substantial risk to pedestrians when high-speed bikes weave in and out.
The least that Penn Police officers owe to us is to stop these riders and explain the law to them. That takes only a minute from their busy schedules, as opposed to writing a ticket. Instead, they do nothing!
It might be helpful if the University posted more of the unoffensive international no-riding signs. I would encourage anyone who is hit by a bike to sue. Although neither Judge Wapner nor Judge Judy sits on our small claims court, our judges are quite able. It might have a dampening effect to relieve some of these riders of a few thousand dollars.
Leigh Bauer Legal Studies professor
Reasons for leaving
To the Editor:
I was disappointed in your editorial ("A surprising early exit for Stanley," DP, 10/2/03), in which you appear to blame the victim, Executive Vice President Clifford Stanley. I am speculating, of course, but as a faculty brat and a 20-year employee of Penn, I am familiar with the University's institutional culture, and I think it likely that one or all of the following is responsible for Clifford Stanley's sudden departure.
1) He had immediate and fundamental differences with President Rodin, trustees and/or Facilities Management. Should this be the case, he was hewing to the highest moral standards by leaving immediately, rather than waiting to be shown the door.
2) President Rodin must have known she would be leaving soon when she hired him, but did not tell him. As soon as she made her resignation public, he realized he would be expected to go quietly in June. Stung by the president's deception, he announced his immediate departure, preferring to go on his own terms rather than remain as a lame duck until June, when he would certainly be expected to go, or asked to leave.
3) Headhunters were familiar with his situation, valued his talents, and offered him another position he had no choice but to take now, since he knew he would be unemployed in June.
I am reminded at this juncture of the unfortunate resignation of History Professor Vartan Gregorian, a popular provost under Martin Meyerson. He was widely expected to become the next president of the University, and had apparently been given some verbal assurances to that effect by the trustees. On the strength of this expectation, he turned down the chancellorship of the University of California, Berkeley. At the last moment, the trustees chose Sheldon Hackney for president, and Gregorian felt compelled to resign immediately.
It seems highly likely that one or all of the above scenarios have some truth to them. In that case, I think that the University, especially President Rodin, owes Clifford Stanley an apology rather than vague editorial speculations about his suitability for a job we have no proof he ever even attempted or was allowed to attempt.
Frances Hoenigswald Invoice clerk, Biddle Law Library
