SPAR revolt?

[BridgeTroll]

that perception can be more damaging then the truth.

Bingo!

[jbm32206]

It's okay to cross post, I've had links to here and other forums.

Anyway, I feel that's an excellent idea you have, and would fully support a vote of confidence and the possibility of either resurrecting HSCC or simply begin a new neighborhood organization. What's happening with SPAR is a serious problem, that they're flat out ignoring.

[AlexS]

What's happening with SPAR is a serious problem, that they're flat out ignoring.

Let's set aside for a moment the recent bylaws change and the perception that the board does not listen to you.
What would be your ideal strategic plan for 2009 ?
What should be the top priorities for SPAR to work on ?
How would you go about achieving your target goals ?
Let's assume your plan includes staff for an office or any other types of expenses, how would you fund them ?
How would you assure you have the proper talent on the board to achieve your mission ?
How would you get the input of the full community (about 6000-12000 people) rather than the 100-300 SPAR members ?

Once the community is convinced that an alternate plan is better than the current plan of SPAR, change will happen.

It is generally easier to criticize what is being done than to come up with a way to do it better. I found some interesting reading at the link below and quoting part of it.
http://www.realinnovation.com/content/c071112a.asp

Criticize

Criticize all new ideas. Point out some of the weaknesses and flaws that will prevent an idea’s success. The more experienced a leader, the easier it is for that leader to find fault with other people’s ideas. Looking askance at the "new" is anything but new:

    * Decca Records turned down the Beatles
    * IBM rejected the photocopying idea that launched Xerox
    * DEC turned down the spreadsheet
    * Various major publishers turned down the first Harry Potter novel

The same thing happens in all types of businesses. New ideas tend to be partly-formed so it is easy to reject them as "bad." New ideas often diverge from the narrow focus previously established and are, thus, easily discarded. Every time a new idea is criticized, the person with the idea is disinclined to waste further time presenting more suggestions. Criticizing sends a message that new ideas are not welcome and that anyone who volunteers them is risking criticism or ridicule.

[uptowngirl]

What's happening with SPAR is a serious problem, that they're flat out ignoring.

Let's set aside for a moment the recent bylaws change and the perception that the board does not listen to you.
What would be your ideal strategic plan for 2009 ?
What should be the top priorities for SPAR to work on ?
How would you go about achieving your target goals ?
Let's assume your plan includes staff for an office or any other types of expenses, how would you fund them ?
How would you assure you have the proper talent on the board to achieve your mission ?
How would you get the input of the full community (about 6000-12000 people) rather than the 100-300 SPAR members ?

Once the community is convinced that an alternate plan is better than the current plan of SPAR, change will happen.

It is generally easier to criticize what is being done than to come up with a way to do it better. I found some interesting reading at the link below and quoting part of it.
http://www.realinnovation.com/content/c071112a.asp

Criticize

Criticize all new ideas. Point out some of the weaknesses and flaws that will prevent an idea’s success. The more experienced a leader, the easier it is for that leader to find fault with other people’s ideas. Looking askance at the "new" is anything but new:

    * Decca Records turned down the Beatles
    * IBM rejected the photocopying idea that launched Xerox
    * DEC turned down the spreadsheet
    * Various major publishers turned down the first Harry Potter novel

The same thing happens in all types of businesses. New ideas tend to be partly-formed so it is easy to reject them as "bad." New ideas often diverge from the narrow focus previously established and are, thus, easily discarded. Every time a new idea is criticized, the person with the idea is disinclined to waste further time presenting more suggestions. Criticizing sends a message that new ideas are not welcome and that anyone who volunteers them is risking criticism or ridicule.

Well since the idea of creating a new organization just came up, and several people have voiced they would like to participate, and it has only been a couple of hours....I would think any group willing to look into this would need to have a little time to discuss, and plan this out. I can't imagine a plan being developed over night, I mean after all SPAR has had years to plan and reach their goal of cutting out the members.

[AlexS]

Well since the idea of creating a new organization just came up, and several people have voiced they would like to participate, and it has only been a couple of hours....I would think any group willing to look into this would need to have a little time to discuss, and plan this out. I can't imagine a plan being developed over night, I mean after all SPAR has had years to plan and reach their goal of cutting out the members.

Since the concept of criticizing SPAR isn't a particularly new one (not just a few hours) I would have thought some plans to exist by this point.
Constructive criticism usually works best. Not only say what you don't like, but also suggest on how to do it better.
I have heard many complain that SPAR isn't listening, but what is there to listen to, if no alternative ideas are presented.
In all fairness I would also like to point out that some people did present constructive ideas which I am thankful for and bringing to the full board.
I am all for making things better. I would not discard the idea of improving the existing SPAR organization rather than creating a new one just yet.

[uptowngirl]

I actually agree with you.

Several points have ben brough up in the past:

more preservation, by working with the city to enforce liens on properties being demolished by neglect

more financial transparency, including understanding how the crime funds are used (not just to pay off duty JSO officers, but how the work is assigned, where they work, and why) and if the neighborhood is getting it's monies worth

More communication with transparency (which you in particular AlexS have made great strides in!)- for instance the bylaws were changed and harldy anyone new about it, elections called off and obviously even some board members did not know- or how votes are decided (which may be a mute point if the membership is no longer allowed to vote council in). Can votes not be displayed because people are just too lazy to write a paragraph on why they voted a certain way? Or is that they really don't want members to know how they voted?

More inlcusion of the entire demographics (criminals excluded) of the neighborhood. renters and low to moderate income residents are almost completely left out.

More business participation-even if it is businesses SPAR may not "like" they are here so let's work with them and see if change can be wrought-as it is obvious ignoring or out right war is not working

where is multifamily, moderate income, or workforce housing on the plan? I may have missed somthing but all I have seen is an attempt to almost squash this development. If we culd get decent, affordable housing for renters we could see some of the "problem" properties go away- hookers and drug dealers do not want to live in a building of law abiding families and workers.

let the neighborhood be more involved. If talking at board meetings is not allowed-it isn;t allowed for ANYONE. Find a way to get more input from the neighborhood residents, some of who gave up on going to meetings long ago. If money is spent on banners, did the residents decide this? was there something else this money could have been spent on such as landscaping, garbage cans, fixing up some of the bus benches? ( I like the banners but some things go a lot further to making the neighborhood look nicer then broken banners)

give the board back to the residents, let them vote on issues, candidates, and appointments.

This is off the top of my head, I am sure I could come up with some ideas given a bit of time...but this has all been communicated to SPAR over the years.

[jbm32206]

Well since the idea of creating a new organization just came up, and several people have voiced they would like to participate, and it has only been a couple of hours....I would think any group willing to look into this would need to have a little time to discuss, and plan this out. I can't imagine a plan being developed over night, I mean after all SPAR has had years to plan and reach their goal of cutting out the members.

Since the concept of criticizing SPAR isn't a particularly new one (not just a few hours) I would have thought some plans to exist by this point.
Constructive criticism usually works best. Not only say what you don't like, but also suggest on how to do it better.
I have heard many complain that SPAR isn't listening, but what is there to listen to, if no alternative ideas are presented.
In all fairness I would also like to point out that some people did present constructive ideas which I am thankful for and bringing to the full board.
I am all for making things better. I would not discard the idea of improving the existing SPAR organization rather than creating a new one just yet.

I would also rather revamp SPAR, but you tell me how we're going to do that with those set into permanent positions? These are the ones that are changing the bylaws and appointing those whom they wish, instead of opening up the positions for others to apply for, let alone allowing the members to vote for.

[jbm32206]

I actually agree with you.

Several points have ben brough up in the past:

more preservation, by working with the city to enforce liens on properties being demolished by neglect

more financial transparency, including understanding how the crime funds are used (not just to pay off duty JSO officers, but how the work is assigned, where they work, and why) and if the neighborhood is getting it's monies worth

More communication with transparency (which you in particular AlexS have made great strides in!)- for instance the bylaws were changed and harldy anyone new about it, elections called off and obviously even some board members did not know- or how votes are decided (which may be a mute point if the membership is no longer allowed to vote council in). Can votes not be displayed because people are just too lazy to write a paragraph on why they voted a certain way? Or is that they really don't want members to know how they voted?

More inlcusion of the entire demographics (criminals excluded) of the neighborhood. renters and low to moderate income residents are almost completely left out.

More business participation-even if it is businesses SPAR may not "like" they are here so let's work with them and see if change can be wrought-as it is obvious ignoring or out right war is not working

where is multifamily, moderate income, or workforce housing on the plan? I may have missed somthing but all I have seen is an attempt to almost squash this development. If we culd get decent, affordable housing for renters we could see some of the "problem" properties go away- hookers and drug dealers do not want to live in a building of law abiding families and workers.

let the neighborhood be more involved. If talking at board meetings is not allowed-it isn;t allowed for ANYONE. Find a way to get more input from the neighborhood residents, some of who gave up on going to meetings long ago. If money is spent on banners, did the residents decide this? was there something else this money could have been spent on such as landscaping, garbage cans, fixing up some of the bus benches? ( I like the banners but some things go a lot further to making the neighborhood look nicer then broken banners)

give the board back to the residents, let them vote on issues, candidates, and appointments.

This is off the top of my head, I am sure I could come up with some ideas given a bit of time...but this has all been communicated to SPAR over the years.

Exactly!

[deportman]

No AlexS, let’s not, see this is typical, answer question with more question delivered in such a way as to make the original questioner seem unknowledgeable of what’s really going on. Of course it is easier to ask question then providing answers.
Has SPAR answered the question of the perceived voting irregularly last year?
Have they provided any answers to why they changed the by-laws?
Have they provided a reason for appointing someone and canceling an election? 
Who gave the executive director the power to appoint anyone? The most glaring example the SHADCO appointment. Sure anyone can nominate someone, but to have the first person nominated then, seconded, then accepted all in one fluid moment, is wrong. I bet no one will advise the SHADCO members of this, so we will just show up and have a new chairperson.
AlexS,  I assume some of your questions will be raised and need to be dealt with and that most of us have the fortitude to take on SPAR. So now we have to find out if some of us are up to this daunting task.

[strider]

Uptown girl, you've got a good list started, and I look forward to working on the details with you.

Deportman and JBM, you both have made very good points.

AlexS - you need to go back and try again.  Read everyone's posts on all the forums and then come back and explain how trying to fix an organization that no longer represents this community at all nor wants any input from the community is going to help any of us.  How, and this is a biggy, can we even begin with no say in the organization at all?

[AlexS]

I marked my responses in orange. I have answered your questions, so will you answer mine now ?

No AlexS, let’s not, see this is typical, answer question with more question delivered in such a way as to make the original questioner seem unknowledgeable of what’s really going on. Of course it is easier to ask question then providing answers.
If people want me to change things (I am a board member listening after all) then I need to know what members want changed. That is why I am asking questions and for no other reason. I need to understand what is asked of me.

Has SPAR answered the question of the perceived voting irregularly last year?
Yes, over and over. Those asking the question just did not like the answer. At some point this needs to be put to rest as the outcome will not change any more. It does not serve anyone to bring this up over and over again.

Have they provided any answers to why they changed the by-laws?
I have explained that on the SPAR board and probably here also. It was mostly based on a LISC consultant reviewing our bylaws and suggesting changes needed to grow as an organization. Although I don't agree on how it was done.
Have they provided a reason for appointing someone and canceling an election?
Appointing Jack Meeks was allowed by the bylaws and a unanimous decision. I think he is a valuable addition to the board. Canceling the election I don't agree with and am still challenging (see my post on the SPAR board).

Who gave the executive director the power to appoint anyone? The most glaring example the SHADCO appointment. Sure anyone can nominate someone, but to have the first person nominated then, seconded, then accepted all in one fluid moment, is wrong. I bet no one will advise the SHADCO members of this, so we will just show up and have a new chairperson.
Louise was not acting as SPAR Executive Director at that meeting as far as I know. She was acting as Shadco member. Second, the position was the one of vice chair and not chair.  Third, all that happened was nominate someone, second the nomination and the person accepting the nomination. No vote has taken place yet. That will be next month.

[jbm32206]

Yes, you're a board member and the only one listening, and even when you have taken our suggestions, they've been voted down or not even given the respect of someone seconding them. That makes me feel confident that SPAR is listening.

As for last years election...I personally contacted both the president, vice president with my concerns, and only the VP responded and we had a good chat, but nothing was resolved. In fact, he agreed with my suggestion to have a committee to oversee the elections...but alas, no elections, no need for any further response.

Clear and simple, the bylaw changes should have gone before the membership, otherwise, they're merely overseeing themselves, and that's wrong.

It was my understanding that the position of which DeSpain has was more or less a position that would have no voting power....that it's more or less a nicety since she's served SPAR for so long.

[strider]

AlexS - you know that I have answered your questions on the SPAR Council forum, so I won't again here.  You have also PM'd me and I have not revealed anything from a PM to me nor will I.  I tell you this in public to remind you that I am showing you respect and still intend to.  That said:

You need to start answering some questions yourself.  Not generic answers, but more details.  Post or send us to the links in the LISC info that says the community organization board of directors shall remove the voting rights from the membership, close themselves off from any real input from the community and allow themselves to be the only voice they themselves listen too.   Or did the LISC suggest getting board members with specific talents and backgrounds and this is the response SPAR Council had to that request? 

Your comments about bringing up the past voting issues as being non-productive are very true.  The SPAR Council board did indeed address this issue and came up with a permanent solution.  No more elections required so no more chance of any irregularities in the election process. 

Yes, Jack Meeks was a great addition to the Board.  I do have to ask, who or which special interest group is he great for?  It certainly was not the community at large when he, as the only committee member, decided not to have elections and did so when it is not legal for him to do so according to the by-laws he is supposed to uphold.

Finally, we come to you listening to us.  From your most recent posts, I would like to ask: who is it you are listening to?  Because it doesn't seem like it is the people posting the facts on this and other forums.  It does seem like you are trying too hard to play the middle here and you will find yourself out in the cold if you are not careful. If you truly take some of what we are saying to the board to try to get changes, you will be ridiculed by them, if you do not, you will lose our trust.  It will come down to being your decision.  Simply chose what is best for you, I for one will not hold anything against you.

[sheclown]

Undone:

PROBLEM ONE: The Class War

LISC has publications that deal with the negative effects of gentrification on a neighborhood. Perhaps that should be addressed. Say, let's get a PLAN to deal with different income levels including protecting our affordable housing and respecting those businesses deemed "less desirable". 

PROBLEM TWO: Let them eat cake.

Half of the time, the "few" don't even know how presumptuous they appear and how insulting it is to the unwashed masses.

Have an election for goodness sake, even if it is "less efficient" it is more respectful.


PROBLEM THREE: keeping one's pants on

A community organization NEEDS to be VERY cautious about accepting "help" from developers. Why is this a difficult concept to understand? Who gets a free lunch?  Either set limits to donations or make it clear what the donors are getting in return.  The perception of a corruption is pretty darn strong here.

PROBLEM FOUR:  preservation vs. revitalization

Understand that these two noble goals are often at odds with one another.  SPAR should ALWAYS place preservation before revitalization.  Once lost, is lost forever.

[AlexS]

My responses in orange.

You need to start answering some questions yourself.  Not generic answers, but more details.  Post or send us to the links in the LISC info that says the community organization board of directors shall remove the voting rights from the membership, close themselves off from any real input from the community and allow themselves to be the only voice they themselves listen too.   Or did the LISC suggest getting board members with specific talents and backgrounds and this is the response SPAR Council had to that request? 
LISC suggested getting board members with specific talents and backgrounds. They also suggested the Board Member Skills Matrix.

Your comments about bringing up the past voting issues as being non-productive are very true.  The SPAR Council board did indeed address this issue and came up with a permanent solution.  No more elections required so no more chance of any irregularities in the election process.
I think the best way may be to come up with specific suggestions of bylaws amendments. I could then make a motion to bring it up for a vote. Ideally we would have large community attendance during this board meeting. The suggestions should mention Article x, section y, paragraph z which currently read '...' should be amended to '...'. Let's work together on change rather than against each other.

Yes, Jack Meeks was a great addition to the Board.  I do have to ask, who or which special interest group is he great for?  It certainly was not the community at large when he, as the only committee member, decided not to have elections and did so when it is not legal for him to do so according to the by-laws he is supposed to uphold.
In hindsight it may not have been the best decision to appoint him one month before elections. At the time there was no vacancy (10-15 board members required, had 14) but yet we appointed him. At time of election only 12 board members are expected and yet he chooses not to have elections. I agree, this does not look good.

Finally, we come to you listening to us.  From your most recent posts, I would like to ask: who is it you are listening to?  Because it doesn't seem like it is the people posting the facts on this and other forums.  It does seem like you are trying too hard to play the middle here and you will find yourself out in the cold if you are not careful. If you truly take some of what we are saying to the board to try to get changes, you will be ridiculed by them, if you do not, you will lose our trust.  It will come down to being your decision.  Simply chose what is best for you, I for one will not hold anything against you.
I try and listen to all parties and form my own opinion. Must be the Libra in me which tries to stand in the middle and balance things out.

My big fear is that also the 10-15 people which are vocal and outspoken here on the forum (including myself) may not be representative of the community (Historic Springfield) opinion at large. I personally would like to see more of a grassroots effort to find out what the community really wants. Considering there are about 70 or so city blocks, it should be possible for one person to cover 1 block and talk to everyone there. So 70 volunteers would be needed or 35 if each person covers 2 blocks.

I have posted a survey on the SPAR board which I wanted to do some time ago.
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/t/stremitz/docs/Survey_6412676_2132008.pdf
I was even willing to pay for it on my own. People with internet access could participate online, people without could fill out the survey in writing and the volunteers type them in. I was utilizing surveymonkey.com. In retrospect the focus of the survey may have been too narrow. On the other hand you don't want too many questions, otherwise no one fills them out. Coming up with good questions to ask would be a start.

Based on the first survey there could be follow up efforts for specific groups (or gather group membership during the initial survey). Then you could break down what home owners, renters, business owners, developers and other groups want. Each group should be represented in meetings to come up with a plan.

Once the plan is complete, it needs to be broken down into actionable items to accomplish the mission. It may be challenging to gather enough volunteers who are willing to put in the time. I recall the Dog Walkers efforts where many would be involved in discussions but few would attend the actual walks due to numerous excuses (not to detract from topic here, just using as example as I was personally involved). Most just wanted someone else to solve the issues for them. I tell you what I want and you fix it, right ?