Anthony West wrote:
Let us frame it as a true dichotomy instead.
why even insist on a dichotomy? I've just finished reading a
bunch of posts by various people on this list who have come
up with a variety of responses about 'where to go from
here,' and it sure doesn't look like options need to be
mutually exclusive.
here's what I've got so far, a quick scrape from posts made
on the list since the morning's announcement:
- - - - - - - -
Community members raised three motions, all of which passed
with scarcely a dissenting voice.
(glenn:) We, at the first Thursday meeting, insist that UCD
make full disclosures of policies and processes to
facilitate transparency and accountability appropriate for a
special services district.
Freda made the motion to retain John Fenton.
Sharrieff made the motion to facilitate a community forum
about this issue so that the community might ask all
questions directly to UCD.
The UC-Review has volunteered to moderate the community
meeting with a suggested location of Rosenberger Hall. It
would be wise for representatives of the Board of UCD to
participate as well as the trustees committees of the
institutions represented. 20 people signed to participate in
a committee to organize the meeting.
I certainly hope that stakeholders in the UCD, both
institutional and individual will attend and that there can
be some productive feedback.
If the major share holders of a special service district
really want community engagement, in the future; we must be
included in honest and transparent processes and the
organization must have accountable and competent leadership.
So, UCD: what's wrong with agreeing that Fenton had made a
mistake, and letting him get back to his excellent work a
bit wiser?
How do we thank John Fenton? Can his job and reputation be
saved? Should we save his job? lose UCD? settle for what we
get (and thus deserve)?
How do we prevent the further co opting of UC by Politics, Penn?
Do we support any person or initiative at UCD?
I think the shareholders and we resident stakeholders would
be better served if they got rid of the existing Board and
Executive staff and rehired John to focus on the street
cleaning.
One possible outcome could be, hypothetically, for all
parties who can't imagine life without John Fenton to create
a corporation, the University City Clean-n-Safe Co., and to
pool the money they would otherwise have given to UCD into
this new organization.
http://www.uta.edu/faculty/mputnam/SPCH3309/Notes/EthicalTheories.html
a link to an interesting piece from the University of Texas
on corporate ethics and corporate governance. Much of it is
relevant to the issue current in UC on UCD
The problem now is who really coordinates the UCD and to
whom is it answerable.
- - - - - - - - -
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
"It is very clear on this listserve who
these people are. Ray has admitted being
connected to this forger." -- Tony West
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
