I disagree Tony. If I learned anything today..it was.
"IT WAS ALL BULLSHIT" from the beginning.
..with no merit at all. No facts, no proof, no disclosure,
thoughtless, petty, insulting, political, and a big crock!
John was "right-sized" for strictly personal reasons.
S
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony West
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 3:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [UC] which bad thing?
Foes of UCD will understandably rejoice in the clear public rebuke
issued it by Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell today. But those who believe
UCD made a mistake face a challenge of their own: decide which action to
highlight for blame and which to forgive.
Those who would fault UCD for potentially engaging in political
activity, thereby running afoul of its 501 requirements, necessarily
require an internal investigation that is both thorough and discreet.
They cannot demand prompt, swift disclosure of anything until an
investigation is finished, nor can they expect any investigation of
importance to be wrapped up in a few weeks.
Those who would fault UCD for relieving John Fenton of his duties and
not wrapping up this investigation swiftly must, then, accept that no
501 issue of substance arose worthy of investigation.
I don't have an opinion as to the rights of the case. I do know that
complex issues -- on the one hand political, on the other hand legal --
surround either judgement. And I am always leery of people who give out
free legal advice for problems they know only other people must pay for,
if their advice turns out to be wrong.
-- Tony West
