SPAR revolt?

[jbm32206]

In order to meet the deadline for submitting questions for the board to respond to...those interested: we'll get together on Wednesday, November 5th at Three Layers at 6:30 PM.

[AlexS]

There will be another meeting, Wednesday the 29th at Three Layers

So is this meeting today still happening in addition to the one on Nov 5 ?

[strider]

Just to clarify - We moved the meeting from today, October 29th to next Wed., November 5th. 

[jbm32206]

Thanks for clearing that up...it was early when I posted it and was running late....

[sheclown]

What time are we meeting tomorrow at 3 layers?

[jbm32206]

6:30 PM

[strider]

Some of us who are concerned about the recent changes to the SPAR Council by-laws are meeting again tonight.  As this is the day after we got to vote for the most important office in the land, it is very appropriate that we address an issue that prevents us from voting or even having a say  in the affairs of Springfield.  Minor in the big scheme of things, but major in our little community.

Our nation cast it’s vote yesterday for change.  We all hope that the change will be good;  good for us, good for the country.  The SPAR Council board of directors voted for change too.  But it is change that common sense says is not for the good, at least not for the common good. 

We urge you to come out and join us for this meeting.  We intend to use it to insure the right questions are asked on the 20th of November and to find a way to insure we get real answers.  And to talk about how we too can make some changes for the good of all of us.

[zoo]

Keep stumping Strider. What "change" do you speak of in S'field? Positive change in the community, which I don't think anyone can deny is happening, or just change in leadership the ensure the community does not change?

But it is change that common sense says is not for the good, at least not for the common good.

Your common sense and mine say very different things. You must not be talking to the "commoners" (your choice of labels, not mine) who are happy to not have drugs being sold on their corner or trash in their front yards.

And a majority is not made up of those most vocal, but of those with greater numbers. I hope the turnout on Nov 20 is statistically representative of the community (though I'm doubtful, even if it is, this thread and it's underlying negativity will be allowed to rest).

[uptowngirl]

Keep stumping Strider. What "change" do you speak of in S'field? Positive change in the community, which I don't think anyone can deny is happening, or just change in leadership the ensure the community does not change?

But it is change that common sense says is not for the good, at least not for the common good.

Your common sense and mine say very different things. You must not be talking to the "commoners" (your choice of labels, not mine) who are happy to not have drugs being sold on their corner or trash in their front yards.

And a majority is not made up of those most vocal, but of those with greater numbers. I hope the turnout on Nov 20 is statistically representative of the community (though I'm doubtful, even if it is, this thread and it's underlying negativity will be allowed to rest).

HA HA!!! You are absolutely right, the neighborhood should not know what is going on, nor should they care, nor should they want to be involved, nor should they get to vote.... I mean heck let's just start lettign a select few hand pick all our leaders???!!!!

btw, where do you live that you do not have trash in your yard or drugs being sold within a block of you? I would guess in one of the areas (limited areas) the crime fund officer are directed to wrok in (something the majority of the neighbors don't get to enjoy!)

[strider]

Keep stumping Strider. What "change" do you speak of in S'field? Positive change in the community, which I don't think anyone can deny is happening, or just change in leadership the ensure the community does not change?

But it is change that common sense says is not for the good, at least not for the common good.

Your common sense and mine say very different things. You must not be talking to the "commoners" (your choice of labels, not mine) who are happy to not have drugs being sold on their corner or trash in their front yards.

And a majority is not made up of those most vocal, but of those with greater numbers. I hope the turnout on Nov 20 is statistically representative of the community (though I'm doubtful, even if it is, this thread and it's underlying negativity will be allowed to rest).

So, I should accept having an organization that claims to represent my best interests but tells me that getting home and to bed on time is more important than keeping the community it represents properly informed or having a say in how it is represented?  (As strider was informed by the president of SPAR Council when asked why only pre-submitted questions were being accepted for the Nov. 20th meeting.) Accept that a select few, only those on the current board, decide that they are the only ones that know what is best for the community and tell us all that we can not be trusted to elect the "right" people to the board so no elections? (Based on comments made by the Executive Director during a phone call to strider).

You seem to be giving SPAR Council's leadership credit for the "positive" changes in the community.  Are you not forgetting how those changes actually occurred?  Did they not occur from the hard work of the many volunteers over many years?  And by several organizations, not just the current SPAR Council? And did those changes not occur during the time that SPAR Council was still concerned with "restoration" and while those same people who are now being excluded from the decision making process still had a vote and many were actually on the board?  I think you are giving too much credit to too few.

As to the "commoners"  - by the way, talking about the "common good" and "commoners" are two different things but your interpretation shows your feelings on the subject - I can talk to one person who firmly believes that the - just as a "for instance" - security fund is a wonderful thing and then, as someone else has posted here, two people who live across the "hood" that believe otherwise. You of all people, Zoo, should know that statistics can be made to "say" pretty much whatever you want them too. 

It is very odd that you, and we know who you have business ties to, accuse us of wanting a change in leadership.  We haven't said that.  What we have said is that we want a voice in who that leadership is. We want a SPAR Council board that has been elected by the community it claims to represent.  Your statement: "..change in leadership the ensure the community does not change?" tells me that you believe that positive change is only possible with the current leadership. I have to ask why?  Why are you and the SPAR Council board so afraid of the possibility of having elected board members? Why is it that you feel the need to have total control of who is on the board?  That give us reasons to be concerned as to what kind of changes you and the board have in mind.  And are those new changes actually going to be positive?

[zoo]

Strider, you and I have spoken in person, and I told you I am not a afraid of a change in leadership, or a vote to elect leadership, or a change in bylaws to ensure some members of the community get to go through the process. And to Stephen's/Dan's points, I'm hopeful all will stop with personal attacks.

I don't claim to represent the community or anyone in it. But just as you might be able to name 100 people that are unhappy with what SPAR is doing, I could just as easily name 100 people who are happy. Putting that into perspective, there are approx 4500 people living within the historic district boundaries (feel free to contact Jim at Ulrich Research to get info on how many would be statistically representative - and if it's 100, yes, either side could "make the numbers say what they want").

You have been claiming to represent the community, and its dis-satisfication with the elected (10) and appointed (4) board. That's right, 10 of them were elected by the members of the community that wanted to have a voice at the time -- were you there? Why didn't you put your boardmember nominations on the ballot then?

SPAR is not a governing, nor enforcement, entity. It is a non-profit charity, that if it can raise the funds, could do whatever COJ, HPC, its own bylaws, its board, and a majority of residents would support it doing. I have seen no evidence of a majority other than through votes that have already occurred. If there is a differing majority, then future elections (which I support wholeheartedly) will bear that out.

I'll be fine with the outcome of future elections. The real question is will you be, if all of your stumping merely results in un-elected boardmember candidates?

[strider]

Zoo, From information I was given, at least 4, possibly 5 were appointed prior to Jack Meeks, who would be either 5th or 6th.  Then, I know at least two, maybe three - one of which was an appoinment from what I can gather, have or will be leaving the board.  We can only assume the replacements will be appointed. 

Your post was fine.  You did forget to mention that while the majority of the board was elected, there is no longer any requirement that there be elections anymore.  Which is sort of the entire point of this discussion.  It is not about getting "our" nominations of the ballot, but just hoping to get a ballot at all.

If you wish to discredit our little movement here, that's fine.  Do your best.  But you should recognize that we have not been reprsenting ourselves as "representing the entire community", rather, we are attempting to insure that SPAR Council actually tries to represent the entire community.  Alittle difficult for the organization to actually do that if they never hold elections again.

To be honest, worrying about how the by-laws were changed to make it possible not to hold elections may be a mute point.  It seems that evidence exists that at least the executive board isn't bothering to follow the by-laws anyway.

So, if speaking out about how I feel this is just wrong and if a group of others agree and speak out as well means we are "stumping", so be it.  At least it is for a good cause.  What are you "stumping" for?

[jbm32206]

As for the small group of concerned Springfield residents, I'm one of them. I find it wrong that the board has changed the bylaws to where elections are no longer required and likely not to be held. This is upsetting as a member and a resident, for it takes away the opportunity of choice as to whom I feel is best to represent the interests of the neighborhood.

[jbm32206]

dont you know zoo. We are being kept out of the process. We arent being allowed to have a say in what happens in our neighborhood. SPARs Stalinist like approach to governing the community (Even though its not a governmental body) has excluded MILLIONS from the process.

Hahaha. It will be impossible to quiet the axe grinding, shy of SPAR implementing ever demand, and unanimously electing Strider as the grand poobah,(I dont think it will stop, regardless). Once he has been elevated to control, he can stop the evil Jack Meeks and Mack Bissetts of the world, and help the common man by putting five or six dudes in every house.

angry and demeaning PM in 5....4....3....2..

If you don't feel the need to be part of the solution, why are you so intent on trying to belittle those who are trying to find one? There's absolutely no need for personal insults or attacks, and they won't be tolerated.

[sheclown]

What could possibly be wrong about questioning a policy which eliminates the community's participation in these elections?  

It is a community organization, for crying out loud.