National Dog Day!
Happy National Dog Day!
Fala was born on April 7, 1940 and given to the President by Mrs. Augustus G. Kellogg of Westport, Connecticut, through Franklin Roosevelt's cousin, Margaret "Daisy" Suckley. At first his name was Big Boy. Franklin renamed him "Murray the Outlaw of Falahill" after a Scottish ancestor. His nickname became Fala. Fala went to live in the White House on November 10, 1940. Every morning Fala had a bone that was brought up on the President's breakfast tray. At night, he slept in a special chair at the foot of the President's bed.
Fala loved to travel with the President on long and short trips by train, car, or boat. In August 1941, Fala was at the Atlantic Charter Conference in Placentia Bay, Newfoundland with the President and Prime Minister Winston Churchill of England. In September of the following year and again in April 1943, Fala went on inspection trips of defense plants and visited the President of Mexico, President Camacho. Later that year in August and then again in September 1944 he accompanied President Roosevelt to the Quebec Conferences. In 1944, Fala was with the President on a sea trip to the Aleutian Islands. Read more about that story on our blog: https://fdr.blogs.archives.gov/2017/10/12/the-adventures-of-fala-first-dog-the-case-of-the-dog-who-didnt-bark-on-the-boat/
While in the White House, Fala was so popular that he received thousands of letters from people and animals from across the country. He had a secretary appointed to him to answer all his fan his mail.
In April of 1945, President Roosevelt died in Warm Springs, Georgia. Fala attended the funeral but seemed lost without his beloved master. He went to live with Mrs. Roosevelt at Val-Kill, where he spent his time running, playing and chasing squirrels and cats. On April 5, 1952, Fala passed away and was buried in the Rose Garden next to the sun dial not far from the graves of President and Mrs. Roosevelt on what would have been his twelfth birthday April 7, 1952.
Continue celebrating #NationalDogDay by exploring some of the Fala related artifacts on our Digital Artifact Collection: https://fdr.artifacts.archives.gov/search/fala
📷: NPx 52-118 - October 22, 1944, Franklin D. Roosevelt with Fala in car at Hyde Park, New York. (UPI photo)
27 notes
·
View notes
OPINION: DiliMall: Not a Mall for All
Photo credit: Lauren Nina Andres
For decades, the UP Shopping Center (SC) was a staple for the UP community. Filled with various stores from computer shops, school supplies stores, photocopying and bookbinding services, to food stalls, and beauty parlors, among others, the SC catered well to the needs of students, faculty, staff, and even residents of the campus. However, in 2018, the well-loved SC burned down, causing vendors to be displaced and its once affordable items and reliable services to no longer be easily accessible.
After the fire, the tenants experienced difficulties with relocating and rebuilding their establishments. According to an article by ABS-CBN, the University’s Business Concession Office drew lots for the affected business owners. Those that were picked were allowed to reopen in other locations on campus, such as Vinzon’s Hall, the Food Hub next to the Fine Arts Building, the Centennial Building, and the Acacia Building, among others. Some tenants were able to rebuild at the old tennis court nearby, provided by the administration as a temporary space, and others opted to reopen in Area 2. A month later, during the 1334th Board of Regents meeting held in April 2018, former UP President Danilo Concepcion announced plans for the rehabilitation of the SC into a more modern structure. And thus, “DiliMall” was born.
The move to rebuild and rebrand the SC as DiliMall was criticized by community stakeholders because the administration’s priorities seem to be misplaced as revealed in the proposed floor plan of the structure posted by the UP Diliman University Student Council (USC) last November 24, 2023. Robinsons Easymart and other known restaurants such as Mary Grace, Pancake House, and Army Navy take up the first floor, while the space given to UP vendors is found on the third floor. Not to mention, the vendors in the tennis court are at risk of being displaced once again since the space will be converted into a parking lot.
This begs the question of whether these “development plans” are truly for the benefit of the community or are merely ways for developers and businesses to capitalize on the university.
In light of this, last March 12, the “UP Not For Sale Network” was launched, consisting of various organizations namely, the USC, Shopping Center Association, UP Academic Workers Union, UP Workers Alliance, Movement for Democratic Governance, and Local College Councils. The network calls against the commercialization of DiliMall and pushes for the prioritizing of the UP Community.
DiliMall is not just the issue
DiliMall is not the first time the UP community has faced commercialization on campus. In an article by the Philippine Collegian, USC Councilor and Community Rights and Welfare Head Kristian Mendoza claimed that DiliMall is part of the implementation of the UP Master Development Plan (MDP), a land use policy approved by the Board of Regents in 2014 aiming to “proactively and systematically” develop UP’s land assets.
Before this, the UP Administration had already begun developing idle lands of the university, approving Ayala Land’s bid to convert 37.5 hectares of land into an information and technology hub in 2006—the UP Ayala Technohub.
The UP Integrated School (UPIS) community is familiar with this issue, as the old Grades 7-10 Building was replaced with the UP Town Center in 2013 by the same developer. From our 8-hectare land along Katipunan Avenue, we were moved to a building built and donated by the Ayala Corporation, a 5-structure facility with a main 4-story building, where the Narra Residence Hall once stood. The new 7-10 Building was budgeted at P180-million, from which P40-million was allotted for upgrades to the Grades 3-6 Building.
Only 10 years later, the Grades 7-12 Building is in a state of downfall, proving to be a great inconvenience and safety hazard to the UPIS community. During the Academic Year (A.Y.) 2022-2023, grades 3-12 students had to share the 3-6 Building since the structural integrity of the 7-12 Building was still being assessed. In A.Y. 2023-2024, although the 7-12 Building was cleared for use, parts of the building have been barricaded due to the degraded structure resulting in longer detours when moving from classroom to classroom and restricted movement among students, teachers, and staff.
The new Gyud Food Hub, which opened in December 2022, posed similar concerns as the development of DiliMall with failing to prioritize UP vendors that have long served the community. In this case, vendors displaced from the Main Library received a handwritten note from President Concepcion assuring them slots in the new facility. However, contrary to the administration’s promise, these vendors were not granted a space in the hub.
Moreover, the implementation of these establishments serves to exacerbate class disparity in the university by focusing on businesses catering to higher-income consumers that exclude students and lower-income community members. Again, the firms affected by the 2018 fire incident in the Shopping Center are still grappling with getting proper spaces allocated among them where established businesses have taken precedence over them.
Additionally, vendors and business owners are not the only ones being displaced by UP’s development plans, but as well as its residents. Homes and residences were demolished and claimed in accordance with the UP MDP. Some of the affected communities were Pook Village C, residents located at the UP Arboretum in 2020, and farmers from Pook Aguinaldo in 2021. These communities and families have been residing in the said areas for decades without any issues, only for them to be evicted from their homes; their livelihoods taken away to give space for “sustainable” infrastructure projects, without proper plans for relocation.
This further demonstrates how commercialization discriminates against marginalized individuals within the UP Community and society.
Additionally, the commercialization in UP Diliman may lead to the phase-out of small local businesses and vendors that have long been an integral part of the community. This greatly affects not only their livelihood but also the culture and diversity of the university’s environment.
Concerns and detractors from the UP community continue to rise towards this issue as stakeholders of the community are negatively affected and neglected by the university. Examples of affected sectors are dormitories, classrooms, and faculty buildings, all of which are experiencing problems with their space, functionality, and facilities.
It is important to maintain and improve the academic environments of UP as this will keep the university’s name, provide equal learning opportunities, liaise with the communities, and secure student wellbeing. These areas are fundamental in the institution for they facilitate learning and contribute towards its success as a top-ranked higher learning institution. To uphold the eminence that characterizes UP, we need to give priority to the conservation and upgrading of academic spaces.
Commercialization for who?
The university insists that converging with the private sector is beneficial as income generated from these rented spaces can be directed to academic and community needs. However, based on the 2016 audit report by the Commission of Audit, it is revealed that Ayala Land Inc. has 209.2-million pesos worth of unpaid obligations to UP. The amount comprises underpayments in rent income and late interest payments for the spaces at UP Technohub and UP Town Center. This raises the question as to why the university continues to commercialize its land when the previous corporation failed to keep up with its lease agreements.
Nevertheless, the university is still in dire need of other means of income. Government funding shortages can be pointed as to why the university insists on commercializing its land assets. Despite the fact that UP’s 2024 budget increased by P508-million, amounting to P24.771-billion this year, 80% of the funds were allocated for the university’s infrastructure projects. Sectors such as utility and maintenance incurred a P1.3-billion cut, and the budget for university operations was reduced for the new budgetary focus. According to an article by the Philippine Collegian, even if the funds for infrastructure were excluded, UP still suffered a P873-million cut. Additionally, P943-million will be cut for the provision of higher education services—which may result in fewer resources allocated to quality education for students. Taking all of this into account, it can be understood why commercialization may appeal to UP—as the university is getting increasingly pressured by almost all sides of its community to take action for its funding shortfalls.
Even so, our integrity as a public education and service institution must come first. It must be emphasized that UP serves as the nation’s model for quality education, and when we allow commercialization and privatization to be fostered within our institution, it may invite other educational institutions in the country to also be dependent on for-profit provisions. Reinforcing this notion, the presence of privatized businesses as stakeholders in the university may greatly influence university decisions, academic programs, and student policies.
In the end, UP must decide between prioritizing the community's interests or pursuing commercialization at the expense of its constituents. However, we’ve experienced the effects of this firsthand: the building we’ve sacrificed for profit forced us to settle for our current building–one that is deteriorating, crumbling piece by piece. We must ask ourselves: are we going to let this happen again? If the university chooses to commercialize its spaces for funding, attention, and care for its students and community must still be sustained.
Therefore, we need to oppose the commercialization of spaces and services in our university, assert our right to quality basic academic spaces and student facilities, stand with the vendors, employees, and families affected, and call on the administration to negotiate better terms with business partners—terms that put the benefit and interest of the UP community first. Furthermore, it is important to stress the need for more funding from the government to be able to run UP’s essential activities and programs successfully. We should come together to protect the good name of our institution and meet its responsibility to the UP community and the Filipino people.
// by Kela Alcantara, Grace Gaerlan, Xia Mentes
Sources:
Abello, L. T. (2024, February 6). UP students protest increasing commercialization of campus spaces. Philstar.com. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2024/02/07/2331536/students-protest-increasing-commercialization-campus-spaces
Abello, L. T. (2024, March 12). UP community on ‘DiliMall’ opening: ‘Do not commercialize the services to the people’. Manila Bulletin. https://mb.com.ph/2024/3/12/up-community-on-dili-mall-opening-do-not-commercialize-the-services-to-the-people-1
Chua, C. (2022, July 6). UP’s Proposed 2023 Budget Set to Fund DaniCon’s Infra Splurge in His Last Year in Office. Philippine Collegian. https://phkule.org/article/586/ups-proposed-2023-budget-set-to-fund-danicons-infra-splurge-in-his-last-year-in-office
Daduya, J. (2023, January 28). “Nabudol kami!”: UP’s small-time vendors cry foul over Danicon’s unfulfilled promises.https://csspsinag.wordpress.com/2023/01/28/nabudol-kami-ups- small-time-vendors-cry-foul-over-danicons-unfulfilled-promises/
Gavilan, J. (2018, March 8). From photocopying services to Rodic’s: What’s inside UP Shopping Center. Rappler. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/197714-things-to-know-up-diliman-shopping-center/
Gonzales, I. (2016, February 25). Ali reviews COA findings on unpaid obligations to UP. Philstar.com. https://www.philstar.com/business/2016/02/02/1549017/ali-reviews-coa-findings-unpaid-obligations-up?fbclid=IwAR2xWm74RVI8zYPn3EHJ9eUw0jaLyj3TMVziHv6i9RFSKZuwoHnDfz-zZsU
Lara, R. (2018). Decisions of the Board of Regents 1334th Meeting, 6 April 2018. The University of the Philippines Gazette, 49(3), 23-24. https://osu.up.edu.ph/2018/04/1334/
Lirio, A. (2023, December 24). An increase with setbacks: A look into the UP System’s 2024 budget. Tinig ng Plaridel.
7 notes
·
View notes