Melani:
1) Racial Discrimination: "Research and proof will need to be presented
during the forum
process." I really don't need to debate this issue on the
listserv. All allegations will
need proof according to the laws.
2) The answer is ..No, there were 300 signatures on a petition to save
John Fenton's job and I am sure
there are at least 1000 more out there to be had. Trust me, the
community process will be newsworthy.
3) It is up to the planning committee to decide what seems reasonable
regarding exclusions. I don't think
this is something to debate on the listserv.
4) It will be in the best interest for UCD and the institutions to
participate in the final forum, it will not
stop the process in anyway and in the end, the truth will be known to
all.
My suggestion to everyone is to get involved in the public process,
nothing will be decided on this listserv.
S
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 11:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [UC] Notes from Planning Committee Meeting Re: UCD 6-13-07
Hi, Sharrieff, I have a couple of thoughts or questions about the points
raised earlier by Doc Baldy, to which you responded below:
In a message dated 6/14/07 7:45:17 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) Racial Discrimination has been alleged because of
the disproportionate amount of whites in management
versus blacks hired for the service side. Research
and proof will need to be presented during the forum
process.
As you certainly know, racial discrimination is a very serious
accusation. In my business, real estate, one would best substantiate a
claim by showing that several parties with the same qualifications, but
different races, had been treated differently. Does anyone know of any
qualified black job applicants who applied to UDC for openings and were
turned down? If not, what kind of research and proof does your group
expect to be able to present?
2) The popular opinion is John became the fall guy for UCD
after what many feel was a caving-in from "media pressure"
by CCD and UCD without any real facts against John.
Doesn't it seem that the listserv is exerting more pressure than any
other source, on this issue? Although our pressure seems mostly
internal, except for its relationship to last Thursday's Glenn Bryan
meeting. I noticed that accounts of that meeting made several
references to the media being present - to a reporter or reporters, and
I thought to a tv crew, though I don't have time to go back and read
through every email again to find the accounts. I've been curious, ever
since we received word of the events of that meeting, as to whether or
not any media reporting was made of it afterwards? I didn't see any
mention of reporting. No one posted a link to anything, though we have
some pretty talented researchers on the list. Did the media do anything
at all, or should we assume that they didn't find it newsworthy?
I think the pressure on the UCD may have arisen from
1) appropriate concern about whether or not the law and/or IRS
requirements had been compromised;
2) the Councilwoman's strong reactions to her role in the student's
accusations;
3) anti BID folks - Al Krigman, to be specific, since he announced on
this list that he was delighted with this situation - threatening the
UCD with actions if they didn't look into the allegations;
4) the listserv itself rushing to judge the UCD, accusing the UCD of
just about everything under the sun.
All of these happenings created a volatile atmosphere where any action
could cause even more chaos. Some parties seemed to react by eagerly
jumping into the fray and trying to cause all-out war, while other
parties seemed to try to avoid that. Both jumping in, and avoiding
jumping in, are now being criticized. It's hard to imagine what might
have been the right thing to do, when there seems to be criticism for
every possibility.
3) We discussed what UCD-Affiliated would mean and suggested
excluding employees and Board Members. Residents who donate
money would be too loose of a definition.
This is very sticky, no matter what you decide. I think that one of the
complaints some neighbors have made to the Councilwoman is that they
felt that the UCD did not include every single community member in
planning efforts. And there have been complaints that UCD folks didn't
come and listen to complaints about them. So, is it appropriate for
this new group to actually put in writing an "exclusion" policy which
community members have decried in the past? If UCD folks are excluded
here, then how will you get them to participate when the Organizing
Committee has questions and/or needs info from them, and again later, as
your group moves forward? (For example, it seems that the Organizing
Committee might need information, in advance, from the UCD about the
Public Forum Topics, and might want UCD folks to attend Public Forums -
especially the last one which you mention under the heading "UC-Review"
as "Moderate Final Public Forum for review of recommendations by panel
representing UCD, Institutions and their Funders." Am I misreading, or
would you want the groups named to be present for that meeting?
I don't know of any UCD affiliates who might want to participate; I'm
just wondering about the exclusion principle.
Melani Lamond
**************************************
See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
