Sharrieff, Please remove my name from the list of your committee. I will not be participating.
I'm sorry you embraced this idea that I brought to your Spruce hill neighborhood alliance all those years ago. What you are doing is nothing like the idea I promoted and you two rejected. I'd like to see the community own the process of a community meeting, not you. I wasn't being provocative I was being sincere. Our community newspaper volunteered to do their job at this important time for our neighborhood. We should appreciate them and not try to read "as an indicator" They have always published different sides when issues arrived. I will be looking in the UC-Review tomorrow to read how the meeting was reported as an indicator. I find that statement distasteful and an indication of how your meeting would move forward. Their very profession demands certain standards that make them a very very good choice to be involved, Don't tell me that because several of us signed a contact sheet that we chose you as our community leader. We have gotten that enough. And if I am interpreting this message correctly, you didn't thank the Review and invite them to your meeting. I signed the contact list and you never asked me if I could even attend tomorrow. Since I'm on this committee, I find that interesting. Is that an indication of the involvement of the other stakeholders of which you speak? Very disappointed, Glenn Moyer ----- Original Message ----- From: S. Sharrieff Ali To: 'Glenn' ; [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 3:44 PM Subject: RE: [UC] Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD Glenn, speak for yourself when it comes to everything! ;-) I don't agree the best possible choice to "take the lead" of an "actual" meeting would be a journalism organization. I don't particularly find your comments flattering to me or the rest of the stakeholders who volunteered. The committee meeting will be "actual", "legitimate", and "responsible in it's process. As usual. you are being provocative. Lets keep it simple for now. The UC-Review volunteered to assist the community with a meeting after the entire room of stakeholders voted and thought it made sense for the "community" to own the process, hopefully assisting us by moderating a forum or giving publicity will not mean supplanting our voices in the direction of the effort. I will be looking in the UC-Review tomorrow to read how the meeting was reported as an indicator. I think it is a good idea for the UC-Review to assist the community in any way possible, particularly from the publicity side but we have many options outside of any newspaper. I am curious to hear what everyone has to say tomorrow. Again, we are just starting to turn the wheels, I have heard all the comments thus far from the listserv members, many..who for whatever..reason can't make it to the meeting tomorrow. S -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:55 PM To: S. Sharrieff Ali; [email protected] Subject: Re: [UC] Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD Sharrieff, Do you have an agenda for tomorrows meeting? I thought Al had some good ideas about the need for a clear focus. Is the idea to discuss the focus and then suggested format for the forum? I was glad you made the motion to do this forum. I was even more happy when the UC Review volunteered to take the lead. It is so vital that this meeting be perceived as fair and impartial. A journalism organization becomes the best possible choice to conduct the actual meeting and will also allow for the best announcing to the community. Will someone be attending tomorrow? I thought it was cool when you called for Lewis's resignation. You and I probably stick out as the two people that certainly can not moderate such an open community meeting. No matter what we did, the perception would be that it would not be fair and I think that would lead to poor attendance at this very importan time. I'm not sure if I can come tomorrow but I agree that the focus needs to be clear and stay focused on issues such as accountability, transparency, and the claim of community partnership. We need to review the conduct of UCD history and their long term policies and procedures. I want answers about representation and inclusiveness and how UCD can justify hand picking all committees and community representatives and call that partnership? I'd like that list of principals Ray has published to be addressed as well. I'd like to get responses to each of those from UCD or get a refusal to do so. In my opinion, that is the discussion the community needs to have with UCD. The format becomes very important with these meetings in order to stick to the focus that we will want to publish when the meeting is announced. Thanks, Glenn ----- Original Message ----- From: S. Sharrieff Ali To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 1:40 PM Subject: [UC] Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD Planning Committee Meeting RE: UCD Date: Wednesday June 13th 2007 Time: 6PM Location: Walnut West Library Community Room 40th and Walnut Street Duration: 1 ½ hours Agenda: Hear from community stakeholders RE: UCD, plan a process Attendees: Current Committee and New Members OPEN TO PUBLIC Questions? Respond to this e-mail ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007 1:39 PM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM
