Now our misunderstanding has gotten in the way of another perfectly legitimate plan, this one of the Community Foundation of Greensboro and apologies are in order.
The plan was for local developer Roy Carroll to fly some elected officials and city staff to Washington so they could make the rounds of legislators' offices to lobby for some money for some nebulous ideas for developing the South Elm/Lee streets area.
According to a statement issued by "the foundation" (no name was reported attached to the statement):
"Questions have been raised as the result of the misperceptions of some regarding the use of this donated plane. While we are disappointed by the misperceptions this travel plan has caused, more importantly we value the public’s trust and do not want to do anything to damage that trust. Therefore, we are postponing the trip."You see? We ignorant morons and our misconceptions. How thoughtless can we be? Silly, stupid us. I thought, on its face, it might be inappropriate for elected officials to fly gratis on a plane owned by a real estate developer; flown for free by a man with interests in issues coming before city council; flown by a man who has a political action committee that attempts to influence local elections; by a man who has made substantial financial campaign contributions to local candidates, including to at least one of those he proposed to fly (Here, scroll down past the annoying, irrelevant video).
Boy was I wrong. I do not know how I was wrong, the statement from the foundation doesn't tell me; but I am confident I would not have disappointed an entire foundation with my notions if my notions were not misperceptions and if my misperceptions were not so disappointing. So with all the sincerity this situation allows me to muster, on behalf of myself and the other misguided morons in Greensboro, I apologize to the Community Foundation of Greensboro for causing it disappointment.
At first I thought it said "mormons" instead of "morons".... I'm like "I didn't know Roch was a Mormon..."
ReplyDeleteTranslation: We will postpone it until we think you have forgotten about it and then try to slip it by you.
ReplyDeleteRoch, I don't see why you rip them for delaying the trip and doing so with an explicit acknowledgment of public comments and a statement about the importance of public trust.
ReplyDeleteIt's the Community Foundation, not al Qaeda.
Public officials were unwise to accept a ride from Carroll, who is a CFGG boardmember.
But Walker Sanders is trying hard to provide some leadership on a vital public issue. He's being responsive and thoughtful. Seems to me he deserves better from you.
"Roch, I don't see why you rip them for..." - Ed
ReplyDeleteI don't rip them for any of those straw men you offer, Ed.
I rip them for not stepping up and admitting the impropriety of this plan; for, instead, trying to pass off their goof as the fault of other people's "misperceptions." Failing to explain what those misconceptions are is also mock worthy.
And where did I say anything about Walker Sanders? I didn't.
Roch,
ReplyDeleteI don't think they saw the plan as wrong. Yes, that's a problem in itself, but it's not the same thing as a secret cabal being exposed and then trying to spin its way free.
In fact, Yvonne was proud of the no-cost-to-taxpayers aspect, which is why she brought it up in our conversation.
What seemed like a good idea at the time, wasn't, and people reacted, and so the plan was changed. Seems like a good process to me.
You didn't mention Walker by name, but as the head of the foundation and the guy who has invested so much in this redev effort, the mockery certainly splashes on him. Seems to me he, and the foundation, deserve better.
Secret cabals! Al Queda! Hyperbole is helpful when you don't want to address the issue I've actually commented on, which is the disingenuous way this was explained away--as the fault of unspecified misperceptions of others. If you have a comment on that, I'd be interested. Otherwise, your plea that blame shifting is somehow a mark of leadership worthy of respect is noted.
ReplyDeleteRoch,
ReplyDeleteI think the organizers made an honest, if non-trivial, mistake, and that the response about perceptions is not some haughty dismissal of the critics, but a way of saying, hey, we weren't trying to do something bad, we were trying to do something good, and people perceived it as bad.
And for me at least, the action (postponing the trip) speaks louder than the words.
Would it be great to hear people say they understand why having pols on Carroll's private plane is problematic? Yes. Maybe we'll get there.
But in the meantime, I think Walker's done a good job of handling the mess.
I'd like to apologize to al Qaeda.
ReplyDeleteSomeday bloggers will receive proper attribution preventing the inevitable snits.
Fec.. press 1 for English.
ReplyDeleteI'm calling Spag to refree this squirting match. But just keeping score myself, Roch, you have pitched a shutout. Congrats
Late to the party again, and agreeing with Ed again, I prefer to remember and look forward to all the good stuff CFGG has done in this community as well as watch how they handle an unexpected understanding of a "free" trip that surprised them.
ReplyDeleteI can understand how the Mayor was pleased she could save all that travel money for the city. I can also understand how she was probably taken aback by the criticism.
I also agree with Ed that this is the Community Foundation, not an organization trying to do BAD things in Greensboro. Their list of accomplishments is long; the take that they are involved in some secretive and untoward process is just sad.
Walker Sanders is the voice of CFGG; any explanations either came from him or were authorized by him. I don't think that needs a lot of research or investigation; rather, it requires a simple knowing how CFGG works.
A question: has anyone who's been critical also volunteered to work with CFGG or the good works it funds to improve this city or perhaps learn more about how the organization works? Or do we just turn on community groups with a long history of success and local funding when they were trying, at least in their own estimation, to save the city money and undertake an economic development and renewal project?
In sum, "sheesh." I am beginning to wonder why any group would undertake anything around here anymore.
Sue, nobody is arguing against or denying the vast accomplishments of the CFGG. This particular incident, however, perpetuates a pattern too common in and unworthy of the expectations we claim to have for Greensboro: That of organizations and people unwilling to make the simplest admissions of the simplest misstep. In this case, it is made more egregious by the attempt to blame it on the people who actually ACCURATELY perceived the problem.
ReplyDeleteI do not want to live in an upside down city, where missteps are lauded and those who observe the missteps are ostracized. Do you?
"and people perceived it as bad." -- Ed
ReplyDeleteBut Ed, it wasn't the perceptions that are in error here. As you seem to be coming sort of close to acknowledging, the perceptions that the plan was inappropriate were accurate.
Now, that is not the same thing as saying, as nobody has, other than you in fashioning a straw man, that the foundation set out to do something bad or had nefarious motives. My complaint was their weak, weaselly, irresponsible attempt to slough this off as the fault of other people's misunderstandings, the corollary to that is NOT that they are a secret cabal with bad motives.
So, rather than something like, "the plan was fine, but people got their panties in a twist because they didn't understand," a response worthy of the kind of credit you are eager to bestow upon Walker would be something like, "In our eagerness to keep the wheels of progress turning in Greensboro, we got a little ahead of ourselves. When people RIGHTLY perceived that having the principal of a political action committee and developer with business before the council pay to fly elected officials to Washington as inappropriate, we concurred and have postponed the trip until we can make other arrangements."
Keep your blinders on Sue
ReplyDeleteRoch,
ReplyDeleteMy reaction is largely to what seems to me your disproportionate response.
They postponed the trip in reaction to public criticism. The subject of Carroll's largesse is now very much in the open. That's all good. It means they're listening.
To this reader, at least, there would seem be more productive ways of highlighting the issues here than flaming them over the wording of the quote.
There are two people from whom I learned to appreciate and respect the power of words, my dad and you, Ed. Your willingness to ignore the significant meaning in the wording of their excuse is disappointing -- even my mom noticed it (no offense, mom).
ReplyDeleteThis is not a binary issue, one can acknowledge that CFGG made the right call in response to public criticism AND fault them for trying to shift the reasons from it being a bad idea to it being the result of others' misunderstandings -- misunderstandings that weren't misunderstandings at all.
You forgot to mention, that lobbying is not illegal, immoral or otherwise bad (unless of course your lobbying for something bad). Explain to me, please, how allowing the city to use one's own plane to fly 8 council members to DC to secure 15 Million in funds for an Education Center at the heart of our downtown is wrong? It seems to me, the exact opposite. If I were to lend you something of mine that would benefit many including myself, am I bad? Are you immoral? The big picture is that we lost 15 million in funds over a ride to DC. You also conveniently forgot to mention that the CITY WAS PAYING FOR THE PLANE. Be precise; read. Society does not benefit from those who spew half the truth. Do your homework before you charge someone with the crime of bribery. I think you are just upset that Carroll has a more volume in his voice than you do because he has done more than you'll ever do for Greensboro with your lousy attack blogs (that I regrettably enjoy). http://www.digtriad.com/video/default.aspx?maven_playerId=immersiveplayer&maven_referralPlaylistId=ca20464c953dcb97b109db6c546b7a53b3539823&maven_referralObject=1173505893
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteYou make several assertions that contradict the record and the principals involved. The mayor thought this would be a good idea precisely because she expected the plane ride to be free. The city and county attorneys thought it was inappropriate precisely because the plane ride would be free. If the City were going to pay for the trip (as you claim and which raises the question of why the city would pay to fly a county commissioner anywhere), why did they have to fly specifically on Carroll's plane?
And who says because these people could not take this trip at this time abroad this plane, no funds will be forthcoming?
In short, you stake out your righteous indignation by getting your facts wrong. I am sure your untruthful presentation is the reason why you wouldn't sign your name.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI might add that you should follow your own advice and "read." You should have started with the press release quoted in the original post above in which Walker Sanders refers to the "donated" plane. It also contradicts your, ahem, half truth that the city was paying for the plane. Get your facts straight, society does not benefit from those who spew half the truth.