[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CVV Meeting & Participation


Sorry for any confusion. Yes, I think we all absolutely want to have another full group open meeting before the Public Hearing with the Commissioners, however, someone else will have to organize it as I'll only be available intermittently this week and next. I was away until late Friday night and had multiple other prior commitments over the weekend, there was no way for me to put out any call for full-group participation or even put much effort into it, and that's why I'm also so grateful to those folks.

As for the past weekend's work, it was a "time is of the essence" issue because we understood that the hearing was to be on 1/22 (changed to 1/29 today), and there was a sense of urgency to make sure CVV got in a request for information as far in advance of that hearing as possible so that our entire group could have ample time with that info prior to then. There was no way to schedule and arrange a full group meeting between the County's announcement on the 8th and a response today, and so the people who I thanked earlier essentially "self-organized" the weekend's work. Also, considering that it took pretty much the entire weekend and most of this morning to get that letter done even with the limited number of participants, I don't personally feel it would have been possible to write the letter by consensus with the entire group in a timely manner.

While I believe that the weekend's attendees are a representative sample of the diverse viewpoints of our group, I apologize and will accept responsibility for any unintentional exclusion of participants for drafting this particular letter. There is no "executive committee" of the group per se, which presumably would have been tasked to do the same thing, and I hereby nominate the people I previously thanked to be our core leaders for such a committee (and not include me).

Also, please note that this is actually an improvement in the process over the previous letter I sent to the Commissioners (the Request for Participation on 12/19) which I essentially wrote and sent without even this much group participation, and about which I heard no similar issues raised. Had I know from that previous letter that more people wanted to be involved in drafting this one, I would have tried to make sure even more people were there. I have the general impression from the limited size of our sub-groups that most of our volunteers don't want to have to participate in every necessary activity, but certainly want to be represented by the group's consensus positions, which I believe our letter today represents and achieves. I again apologize if anyone wanted to participate and now feels excluded, please hold me alone responsible for failing to make sure the entire group knew such activities were occurring.

Thank you for your e-mail, I'm sure others must have felt the same but didn't write. Please don't hesitate to let me know if I can clarify this particular letter any further, if there are issues that should have been included in the letter but were overlooked, or if there are any other problems I've caused or can correct. Anyone who's been to our meetings knows this isn't the first time someone has criticized my work or effectiveness, I certainly hope to learn from my mistakes so I truly appreciate being told what they are.

I'm very sorry that this letter caused any such confusion or the appearance of exclusion. I personally remain absolutely committed to maximizing public participation in this process, and hope that in the broadest context this weekend's effort by a few is actually seen as helping the goal of including many.

Like everyone else in our group, I hope Boulder County gets the best possible voting system. Please bear in mind that this letter was simply one step in that process, and by no means the final word.

Sorry and grateful,

Joe




On Jan 12, 2004, at 4:06 PM, Laura Price wrote:

I was wondering if there are any plans to schedule another CVV meeting prior to
the Jan. 29th public hearing.

Based on the prior message thanking some members for "an intensive weekend of
work", on CVV's public response to the County's announcement, I am confused as
to how CVV is communicating opportunities for interested individuals to
participate and contribute to our efforts.

During prior meetings it was indicated that this list was to be CVV's main
method for organizing and building consensus, yet I don't recall any messages
offering the opportunity for any/all interested members to participate in
recent CVV efforts.

Please let me know if I am somehow mistaken about CVV's methods of
communication and participation.

thanks, laura.