I want to inform all of you that the Board of DHHIG has responded to their letter of concerns regarding the Call of Nominations letter. We do appreciate their quick response. However, the Board’s response hasn’t resolved all of their concerns regarding the election process. We will wait and see what the new committee’s responses to our concerns are before we move onto other issues. There are still some other concerns arising targeting the works of the organization. For example, 1) transparency, 2) membership involvement, 3) abiding the policies and the by-laws, and the last one-ethics. Each of these issues will be discussed via vlogs/blogs soon so please keep your eyes out for these. For a long time, members have been very laid-back regarding activities in DHHIG. Now is the time for you all to speak up and become actively involved. The first step is simple.. become a member by applying on DHHIG’s website now. (it’s free! All you need to do is fill out the membership form with your address and email). DHHIG is currently searching for members for the election committee. Go ahead and apply to be on the committee! - That’s a good start for you. The second step is to become familiar with the procedures and the bylaws with the current organization by asking other current members, DHHIG’s website and this blog site cfdge.wordpress.com. You have the opportunity to make a difference! Thank you for watching!
March 9, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
John, those are serious claims. We can vouch for #6 but he (Steve) will explain it in upcoming ethics vlog. At this time, I’ll remove your comments till you can provide us some evidence to back up those claims.
We are aware of the retreats that the board held in the past.
Aaron would have to tell us this himself (claim #7).
March 9, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
fyi- this is in response to John’s comments, that we unapproved recently
March 9, 2009 at 10:50 pm |
I’m just an observer of this. All the spat-like politics going on involving those concerned with DHHIG makes me wonder if there’s justification for holding DHHIG NTCs? I was told that this event is quite extravagant–a contrast to the morale within the DHHIG as far as boards are concerned. Does DHHIG’s NTCs receive federal funding? If yes, this is a sham because there must be justification in name of all the concerns being resolved. This need not be a social organization. Why? Just ask many grass-roots sports organization that went down under because they functioned under a different premise. Oh, not to mention the annual spats!
March 10, 2009 at 4:47 pm |
Please treat NTC separately from the DHHIG drama which is being discussed in this VLOG. It is not an extravagant conference as you say, rather it is a training conference with serious intent. Federal Agencies pay for training for all of their employees, this is just one option which is available. You have a choice with your training dollar, if you don’t choose to spend it at NTC, don’t do so–but don’t trash talk it to others!
There are some of us on the sidelines who only wish the best for DHHIG and the wider federal Deaf community, and we are working earnestly to keep a positive reputation for DHHIG without becoming involved in the politics of all of this. I ask you to please keep NTC out of this discussion, and allow those of us who choose to remain neutral, to do so. Thank you.
March 10, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
We apologize if it seemed that we were trash talking the NTC. It was not our intention. This VLOG/BLOG is not targeting the NTC or its hard-working volunteers.
We are focusing on ensuring that the DHHIG election will be open and fair for everyone to participate and at the same time, bring up the issue of transparency, membership involvement, abiding the policies and the by-laws, and ethics
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
March 11, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
How can DHHIG and NTC be separated? I know both are separate entities. NTC is a prominent aspect of what drives DHHIG. What is one without the other? Look up the Website of DHHIG and you’ll see. I know semantics, nitpicking and what not will prevail but you can’t deny that for fact.
March 14, 2009 at 3:39 am |
This site is so full of half truths that I am compelled to respond for myself especially that you have published my name along with the Board members’ names in one of your inflammatory remarks.
My name is John Olumoya. I am a current board member. I emphasize here that I am speaking for MYSELF and I am NOT an official DHHIG board spokesperson.
I have been a DHHIG volunteer from day-one. I started out as exhibit coordinator for NTC in 1996. I am not a “career board member” but I am proud of my community service record, commitment and loyalty to DHHIG. My DHHIG record is not anywhere on my resume even though my supervisor proudly supports my participation as a work-life learning experience.
I don’t know what your group really wanted. Is it revenge? Shall we wait for the VLOG where you plan to explain the part about why several of you resigned from DHHIG board / NTC committee that you are now trashing?
Can you explain why you are censoring the response that the DHHIG board sent to address your original “open letter”?
DHHIG board graciously sought you out in 2007 and installed you as the NTC 2009 Chairperson. It is hard work finding volunteers who want to work hard.
You started well.
However you broke away and did not want to work with the board, saying they were micromanaging you.
You have never been to a DHHIG NTC. How could you say it is extravagant?
The volunteers currently on board are hard at work to make it succeed. No DHHIG volunteer is ever paid even though it is a lot of hard work planning a conference of this size with just a few people.
If your group’s goals are noble, your approach would have been to send a memo to the DHHIG Board asking them to consider and work on your ideas with you. You know how it works internally.
Alluding to control of DHHIG e-mail is sensationalism. If you have a copy of an e-mail you have sent to us that we have not acted on, please post it here or send it to us again along with dates and times and we will research it.
DHHIG is not a secret society. Membership is free and open. The board members are all elected volunteers or are appointed to fill vacancies. Unfortunately, the DHHIG by-laws limit the number of Board Members to 11.
It takes hours of scarce resource time to set up a “well-oiled” organization with people donating just a few hours of their time per week. These volunteers all have full time jobs. They cannot do DHHIG volunteer work during government work hours. Most of them have families to take care of in the evenings and weekends.
If you know a better way to run the organization, improve the bylaws, write up the policies, get volunteers to really work (you cannot order volunteers around, you know), then yes DHHIG needs your ideas. We have not seen this kind of positive contributions. When you are done contributing these ideas, don’t take those ideas with you when your term is over or you resign from DHHIG. DHHIG cannot continue to stand when volunteers do not freely contribute ideas.
People who set up DHHIG in 1998 left a legacy of ideas that we still are trying to set in motion. It is hard work. We don’t trash talk those ideas because they are noble. They are difficult to implement and there is no magic solution.
We are doing the best we can and as volunteers, the only thing we ask for from other members sitting on the sidelines is a simple “Thank you” for our time, not a dagger in the back.
March 15, 2009 at 4:11 am |
John,
There is no need to make this “personal.” Our concerns are not “personal.”
We, the members, simply want the correct procedures followed and transparency in everything.
There is no need to become defensive. When a new treasurer is elected then everything will be made clear to the members.
If I am elected, I promise an AUDIT by neutral tax business, to be voted on by the MEMBERS after prices and procedures are posted.
If I am elected Treasurer, the results of the audit will be posted on the DHHIG website, and also monthly reports showing where monies are coming from and where they are going. There will be spreadsheets and pie charts to clarify details.
There will also be an accounting for money spent for NTC, and all events, by which I mean receipts will be scanned and pdfed and saved to a briefcase so that the members may view what is spent and make suggestions on how to save more money or how better to find contractors that can give more value for the money.
We do not want to “trash” any event or person. That is not our intent. However, I must say that the picture of the crab theory displayed after a member made observations on the voting procedures..makes me wonder why that picture was posted.
All Deaf know what a picture of a Crab means. It can be no mistake that it was posted there. Why would it even be in a DHHIG officials possession? I don’t have one. Was it to be used when someone stepped out of line to shut them up? To make members jump to conclusions without reading the whole story so that they assume that it must be some Deaf people that want to “trash” DHHIG/NTC?
Whatever the reason for it being in your possession, and then being posted on the site. it is obviously inappropriate. It was inappropriate for it to be in your possession (why would you want to call another Deaf a Crab?). and it was inappropriate that it was posted.
March 15, 2009 at 1:59 am |
Everyone- I apologize in advance if its LONG.
Mr. Olumoya,
Your comment on the website appears to be towards me personally and I’m more than happy to answer the questions you asked.
I have included 5 other people in this e-mail because I believe by reading your comments; you have insulted their intelligent as if they were my followers taking orders directly from me, quote from your comment: “you cannot order volunteers around, you know”
The purpose of our vlog/blog is to allow the DHHIG members to express their concerns freely. They are aware that DHHIG has accomplished many things. We are not saying that DHHIG board sat around and did nothing. We know it’s a hard work and we do not want to discourage any potential and current volunteers to participate. On a positive note, our blog has provided references to DHHIG’s website hopefully to generate more volunteers and members. We have heard several new members have signed up and have offered to volunteer. We have tried our best to encourage everyone to participate in the election committee, and the recent committees that DHHIG just “finally” opened after being 1 year and 10 months late.
Our issue is clear, and it is –The Members! I do not recall any blog or vlog entry that trashed anyone, but to spread awareness that members are concerned about the fairness of the election, lack of transparency, members’ involvement, and abiding with the DHHIG’s by-laws and general Government Ethics. We are not targeting anyone in particular but the problems I identified above.
When DHHIG released the call of nomination letter, I could see that the Board had customized and added the qualifications/eligibility of the candidates to their “preference”. I asked several people to check the by-laws to see if it’s even allowed. They did and concurred with my concerns. I even sought advice from several DHHIG members who are in the legal field and they also agreed that the nomination letter violated the by-laws, names are not necessary, and they also pointed out that by adding recommended qualifications and EVEN ALLOWING THE CURRENT CHAIR TO BE ON THE ELECTION COMMITTEE makes the election not neutral at all. There would be public outrage if former President Bush became involved with the U.S. election commission and started inserting recommended qualifications on the application documents when McCain and Obama were out there campaigning. Same principle here! This is nothing about revenge. We had and still have valid concerns and it is ensuring fair and open election for ALL members!
DHHIG has accomplished so many things over the years, and I have high respect and always do for the founders who founded this organization from cradle. It now has become one of the most important resource and advocacy groups for the deaf and hard of hearing in Government. I do not want to see that destroyed or ruined. I do want to see DHHIG to raise its par to be in the same league as BIG and other Government employees advocacy organization. Even though we can’t match them in size but we can match them in respect. I strongly believe that DHHIG the potential to be in the same category, if it starts to allow members in and exchange information and ideas. Once members do the projects themselves, they can at the same time recruit more volunteers. NTC is great examples of a success story of volunteers’ recruiting other volunteers.
DHHIG needs its own members to succeed in long term. That includes, delegating members to take over some of the DHHIG projects, and the board being transparent. I don’t understand why many of you continue to deny members access to your meetings and minutes. You all get so angry if a member in the board leaked some information. Why???? You all should be focusing on DHHIG’s mission/objectives, rather than go on “Rat Hunting”. You stated that DHHIG is not a secret society, well from the looks of it, it is in my opinion since the information exchanged from the board to the members are limited and Board members get so upset if any of the information is leaked.
Mr. Olumoya, I want to personally praise you for your endless volunteer service. However, 8 years as a treasurer does raises some concerns. Especially if there are no audits/reports regarding DHHIG’s finance activities made public. There is a reason most organization have limited terms each officer can serve. I believe that is the reason Mr. Rohem brought up a valid point in the blog site
Can you please point out where WE made the inflammatory remarks and trashed the NTC? If you are talking about Steve V and John, ironically, they have both of our names; anyways they are a DHHIG member expressing how they feel. We do not control how other members feel about this organization. This is America and I’m all for democracy. I completely respect other members’ opinions whether we agree or disagree. You should do the same otherwise there is no sense for you to serve on the board. I am not quite sure why Mr. Hawkins views the NTC as extravagant event. Maybe that is a hint for you board members to start reaching out to your members and start asking them, “how we can better serve you, and make this organization better”.
On a side note, I strongly suggest you to get your facts straight before you make public comments like this. I never resigned but was forced out by you guys. A Vlog by me regarding this situation will be posted shortly. Ms. Broadus never resigned; she simply didn’t go for a re-election. She had her own reasons. Both Matt and Brian are current volunteers on the NTC committee and I’m glad to have them in the NTC. I can see future leadership in them as they learn the process. As for other members, they simply left when the NTC team was dismissed by the Board of Directors by asking me to leave. As you know “The ship sinks with its captain” and my committee agreed that I didn’t deserved to be treated that way by the Board.
You claimed that none of us, me in particular, attended NTC. I’m afraid you are also mistaken on this one too. You claimed that I refused to work with the board; it was actually the Board that refused to work with me on my concerns regarding ethics and abiding with the DHHIG’s by-laws and policies. I cannot on a good coincidence continue to break the ethics rule in the Government while you all try to hush me up.
Your actions, by posting the “crab mentality” message on the DHHIG’s website after we had sent in the concern letter is one of the reason many members are not comfortable sharing their ideas or concerns with the current DHHIG board. You have not offered an explanation or even an apology for the “blurb”. Please don’t deny this. We know it was you.
We started several of our post by thanking the board for your quick response, even though the board didn’t resolve any of the issue in our concern letter to-date.
By simply posting a volunteer link on DHHIG’s website is not the best way to get volunteers. You have to be actively go out and fish for them. When I approached several members, they were surprised to learn that DHHIG needed several volunteers. They assumed since they didn’t say anything, everything seemed good.
You inquired about why we haven’t posted the board’s response to our letter on our blog. The answer is very simple- it is not our job to be your “public relations machine”. DHHIG has its own website and even a mailing database to use.
Kirsten Poston has proposed a “town-hall” several times. I believe that members would be open to that idea ONLY if they would be allowed to share their concerns and ideas. If it just a meeting to listen to DHHIG explain its own accomplishment, then no it is not necessary because we already know DHHIG has done several wonderful things. We are thankful for the volunteers. We would love to hear how can DHHIG better serve its own members and allow members to express themselves freely with the Board LISTENING and try to make the changes to better serve their own members!
Before I close this long letter, we are seriously concerned about the lack of activity regarding DHHIG’s upcoming election. Several people have informed me directly that they applied to be on DHHIG’s election committee. They haven’t YET received a THANKS for their interest message or even been invited to any of the election committee meetings lately. It is safe to assume at this point that the decisions will be made arbitrary without addressing the members concern. I believe your actions to-date have confirmed our concerns. Once again, DHHIG, please open the door to the members and get busy resolving the election concerns to ensure EVERYONE will have the opportunity to run and vote. I look forward to the election!
Thank you.
March 15, 2009 at 11:22 am |
Deborah,
If you want me to believe this is not personal, then please simply suggest you want to run for “any DHHIG board position” – not plan a direct attack to displace the Treasurer whom you perceive was calling you a crab. You harped on this continuously as if it is the main issue….
You insinuated that there is impropriety by lack of financial audits. I take that a personal insult. So please forgive me if I appear defensive of my personal integrity. You were on the board with me a couple of years ago. You had access to board financial reports. You certainly could have assisted in looking for auditors and present them to the board if you believed there were improper financial handling going on.
I have never stated “you are a crab.” I’m not sure why you feel insulted about something that was not directed specifically at you. “Crab mentality” is defined as a metaphor. There is no place I see it defined as an insult to any community or person. Stop the mud-slinging. A smear campaign is “dirty” and doesn’t work to get votes anymore.
I’d be more concerned if you call me a useless DHHIG Board member though. I’ve not been useless to DHHIG.
Your attempt to challenge my board position will be very noble if you outline a proposal and a complete plan of what you will do to solve one of the several workplace problems DHHIG members have when you get on the board. That is what we should be spending energy to debate now.
DHHIG board does not exist mainly to do Treasurer’s audit, manage monthly reports, etc. (We hardly take in any regular income or spend more than $90/month unless there is a major program underway, so managing the money is not our major area of need for a volunteers right now.) We need volunteers to lead creative efforts to solve workplace issues not complain about monthly reports.
I’d be glad to step off this Board entirely for your group if you make sincere effort to bring create solutions for DHHIG board and really plan to lead it to fruition. I could work hard alongside you but I don’t believe that is really what you want. I am not against you or any other volunteer coming forward.
I’ve invested 10 years of community service into this organization and want to see a joint effort to bring solutions to the real issues. By the way, I do more than Treasurer’s work for DHHIG. I help to run many other facet of the business. It keeps me pretty busy and I do have a hectic full time job as well.
March 15, 2009 at 2:40 pm |
“I’d be glad to step off this Board entirely for your group if you make sincere effort to bring create solutions for DHHIG board and really plan to lead it to fruition.”
Whoa John…. What are the members say in this? Don’t members get to decide who stays, and go goes by voting???
BTW- if you must know, there are only 2 folks that we know of is interested in running. There is no “group”, just a bunch of concerned members.
March 15, 2009 at 12:03 pm |
Steve,
I’m forced again to respond because of some glaring misunderstanding of certain phrases in my earlier posting.
(By the way, everyone is allowed freedom of speech in a democracy and whatever coherent perspective they choose to take in a debate – or “protest” – deserves to be heard. Please do not turn a debate into an “attack” or consider an alternate view an attack. There is no direct attack on you in any way. My opinion of what you are trying to do may be strong but I’ve not done anything vengeful like you seem to be implying.)
First, I’m not trying to insult anyone’s intelligence. I don’t know why you try to twist that phrase “you can’t order volunteers around, you know” and make it look like I am insulting you. I respect ALL the folks who signed your open letter as well as those you sent copies to. Some are my respected colleagues I will not dare to insult any of them. I work with them daily.
The phrase “you can’t order volunteers around” has nothing to do with your open letter. It is an experience of fact on my part that I was just sharing. It means that when people volunteer to serve, I consider that we can only treat them as such. Their diligence is entirely voluntary. If they want to accept a project and finish it, it is entirely voluntary. The DHHIG board has no force to compel anyone or any committee to finish a project. So if we have 11 elected board members and some want to work and some want to just sit “for the experience” and do nothing there is no way you can order them to produce. Because… “They are VOLUNTEERS….”
I will be the first to tell you that it can be really frustrating and I will admit to you that it is very real. It is not only DHHIG Board that experiences this phenomenon. Sometimes it can even be a drag working alongside them as they often do not offer a solution to problems they bring up.
Everything volunteers do are of their own volition. So, what DHHIG volunteers do is not compelled. Requests (not orders) can be made. If volunteers promised to produce and they didn’t, we cannot “fire” them like organizations do to remove non-producing “employees” but the members can choose not to re-elect them (if they volunteered to serve again) when they have proven to be non-productive in the past.
(The term “produce” should be analyzed carefully here. If you have requested in the past that a product be produced by a certain volunteer and it has not, then please remind us of when you sent your request for a product that we have not produced….)
I’ll respond to other issues later on.
March 15, 2009 at 1:12 pm |
Frankly, I’m not interested in going back n forth with you. This would take years. We have issues on our hand and it is so simple to fix with the board’s willings.
fairness of the election, lack of transparency, members’ involvement, and abiding with the DHHIG’s by-laws and general Government Ethics.
We are attacking those ISSUES! We have even offered solution for each.
March 15, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
I agree! We need to adress the issues.
Have the website been adjusted so that people can nominate themselves for postions? I sent in my nomination, how will the members know who is running for which positions in time to vote?
John, your wording of “You insinuated that there is impropriety by lack of financial audits. I take that a personal insult” is interesting. Take it how you will. It is not good business procedures for ONE person to have complete control of the finances for so long with NO audits at all and audits had been suggested a number of times by me if I recall correctly.
I did not have access to the financial records. As I recall, you did not make many reports, and when you did, your reports were not substanted by facts. You simply gave numbers and told us what was in the bank and showed a few bank statements. That method is not Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_GAAP .
DHHIG volunteers, may only be volunteers, but this does not give them leeway to do things their own way all the time. There is a way to do things that is accepted as legal and correct. For anyone that is not doing things in the legally correct way (even as a volunteer). Regardless of the fact that DHHIG is comprised of volunteers and can’t be “ordered” around. They can be removed by the MEMBERS during a voting process; this is the DEMOCRATIC way. For you to state that you would “step down” implies a anarchy. You are a volunteer the same as any other DHHIG board member. Perhaps you chose your words unwisely? Are you implying that you are so insulted that you would “quit” before the voting?
That would also be unethical and raise more questions. You do not need to defend your way of doing business. Anyone that takes over should start with a clean slate, this means that ANYONE that runs for the position of TREASURER should be willing to have an AUDIT done before taking over the books.
Please let’s adress the issue of having members able to volunteer to run for positions, by having the website able to accept nominations. I emailed the chair of my desire and asked what was the next step…I haven’t received a response back yet. Perhaps the email was lost?
March 17, 2009 at 11:49 pm |
Deborah,
It is clear you want to hold the money bags for DHHIG so badly. I’m starting to wonder.
It’s a lot of work. I’m not paid to do it and it’s not something special. It is other people’s money and the board has the only authority on its dispensation. When an audit is done, it will be clear that it is well managed financial posture. You will be satisfied. I’ll make sure you are.
It would be credible if you found out that the Board had tried to audit the Treasurer and he resisted. That has never happened.
The message you wanted people to miss here so you can win the position you are seeking is that
(1) we are still looking for volunteers to do the audit;
(2) advisors do not think it is worthy hiring professional firm at the tune of possible $15,000 price tag to do audit for this size organization.
You were on the board. You know what the difficult issues we faced daily.
I’ll remind you about some of them –
* Getting the by-laws straightened out
- it is something we inherited and even those who cry out about it do not come up with solutions to fix the flaws. I personally have struggled with the flawed bylaws but I am reminded only members must fix them;
* Getting the policies straightened out
- we are still doing the best we can but this require expertise. It is enormous work for small group ofo volunteers with often divergent ideas;
* Getting volunteers who would serve on committees -
- if I recall, you had to recruit board members to assist with the one day seminar you chaired and I insisted you should have recruited outside the board. That’s just an example
* Getting Subject Matter Experts to work on issues presented to us by members (via info@dhhig.org). There are numerous and we are not “the experts” who can device the complex workplace solutions presented. By the way, ideas can also be sent to us at this e-mail address as well. We are working on building a database of the information we have collected. No easy task for the hardworking team doing this. I applaud them.
* Getting volunteers who would help run business errands – DHHIG is a business and when a member calls, someone is supposed to answer the phone, someone is supposed to manage the e-mail system, someone is supposed to write professional looking articles on the website. Oh, the website. We’ve had some problems with hackers trying to bring us down but we haven’t had to pay for the expertise of a skilled volunteer protecting the integrity of our membership records.
There are lots morewe do – like trying to design a next generation website to accomodate better member interface – but this is just an example of what 11 people have been trying to accomplish in a short time on part time basis.
If you give them some support you might see a report of their accomplishment when their term draw close to an end. Be patient.
There has never been many volunteers that DHHIG would turn anyone away or screen them out. Just about anyone who volunteer gets elected.
It is hard putting a cohesive group together though.
Even with great football teams being paid million dollars per player, its not easy to get a smooth game running without support from the fans.
An appaluse is always encouraging. It is good for morale.
Thank you.
March 18, 2009 at 2:45 am |
To CFDGE group and all interested parties:
This is David Stout and I speaking for myself basing on my personal observation and experience being a webmaster for DHHIG and web/database advisor to the board.
Before anyone jumps the gun, I have no voting privilege nor do I have any special advantage or benefit knowing beforehand of all the decisions being made by the board members. I am merely a dedicated volunteering member, who is a firm believer of making DHHIG a strong viable organization as possible. I am always aiming to be fair, open, and honest with anyone as possible; and this is a fact, I don’t personally waste my time hang around with those people who deliberately enjoy intimidating or being cruel to any people.
I suppose that the CFDGE group believes that it is being fair and objective by opening up the doors to all, by being transparent as possible as to help making DHHIG a better organization, by setting their own web site and posting unedited comments without going through the vetting process. I do not know; I won’t question CFDGE group’s motives.
I do believe that the decision-makers at the CFDGE are doing a sad injustice to human decency in this case — it alludes to possibility that CFDGE enjoying argue over petty things among themselves and engaging in reckless or malicious insinuating behavior that causes discomfort or annoyance in others. It seems crystal clear that ultimate purpose of setting up such web site is placing DHHIG and certain board members in a confining or embarrassing position.
Like it or not, I agree with most posters’ messages in regard to DHHIG is not always being opened to all members across the country and not acting upon the bylaws.
Again, DHHIG does have lot of works to do cleaning up their bylaws – unfortunately, the board members itself can not legislate the bylaws – only registered DHHIG members can make proposals, laws, bills, etc. or bring into effect by legislation. Only DHHIG members can issue “point of order” on the floor to correct any mistakes. The sad truth is no one points it out for years, including number of Open Letter’s undersigned folks who were on DHHIG board, committees, and voting members until Steve rightfully pointed out various loopholes and lack of action of enforcing, ensuring observance of or obedience to the bylaws.
My main real point of this posted message, which is the important critical thing to me as far as being diplomatic as possible, is that there isn’t any information posted here indicating CFDGE group openly and honestly communicates their concerns directly with DHHIG nor is there any evidence of direct plan, organize, and carry out advanced communication between CFDGE and DHHIG before they created this “shenanigan” site.
I hope you all remember or recall reading former U.S. President John F. Kennedy’s famous “Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You” inaugural speech. So asks not what DHHIG can do for you, ask what you can do for DHHIG and all Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing federal employees.
I don’t see nor do I recall the Open Letter’s undersigned group presents evidences asking DHHIG what the group can do to serve any committee and improve DHHIG in recent years and at the present time; it seems the group collectively prefer standing on the sideline do nothing and wait until the next DHHIG election cycle to start CFDGE site to blurt it all out without even bother to being proactive members of DHHIG.
Evidently, CFDGE undersigned group acts in unison and in secret towards a deceitful or carping purpose because all I know is DHHIG received an ‘Open Letter’ from undersigned group and there is no indication you plan to have open discussions on ‘Open Letter’ at another web site. It that transparent and openly honest doing stuff without advanced notice send to DHHIG that you plan to have such web site?
It seems CFDGE group is in reactive mode — participating readily when election announcement is made to the public. Let me be blunt, it is actually similar in quality or character of maintaining the crab theory within the Deaf community — every man, woman or group is fighting for themselves and hoping the organization fails so you can take over.
It seems the group is in proactive mode as well — going on the sideline proactively promoting your “Open the Door” causes to other folks — you know I don’t ever recall DHHIG getting an email from anyone saying “Open the Door” to them. In fact, the door has been opened since day one — all you need to do ask. Does your employer reach out for you to give you a job? NO! You have to go out and apply for it. Does the Congress reach out for your to solicit your opinion before they cast their vote? No always since you still have to go out to get in touch with your congressional members. Same idea with DHHIG — just visit the http://dhhig.org and you would find information there how to get in touch and be involved with DHHIG.
There is nothing wrong having ‘Open Letter’ at another web site, such as this site, providing you courteously give DHHIG advanced knowledge about it. We heard nothing until one DHHIG board member allegedly found out about it through Google search site by searching for “DHHIG OPEN LETTER”; while on the same day we were informed about it — Google and Yahoo! search engines didn’t have any link to CFDGE site until two days after we’re informed about it. I smell something fishy here — I do not know; I won’t question anyone’s motives.
Interesting thing is that both Steve Gagnon and Deborah Broadus were former board members and both knew DHHIG had setup a DHHIG Members Only Forums — it is available to our members since day when each of them is on board; however, no one is willing to volunteering to moderate it. Again, that is out of DHHIG’s control since Steve and Deborah, collectively together as a part of the CFDGE group, already decided not to use it as DHHIG members and busy campaigning their causes at CFDGE site.
I had hoped that the CFDGE site would serve as a venue for serious discussion of important issues affecting DHHIG. But the string of intellectually vapid, shallow, emotion-based, scurrilous attacks on the DHHIG board members or DHHIG itself is a disgrace. You may not see all the comments to which I refer. If we are fortunate, by morning, afternoon or evening, the CFDGE may have deleted some of them.
The viciousness of the childish comments by some posters hiding behind their masks says far more about them than it does about DHHIG’s governing style. And what it says is enormously disturbing.
While it is true that some posters will say, with anonymity, what they would not dare say publicly, it is nonetheless without excuse or justification.
The thing you need to know that ad hominem argument always a fallacy; as evidently some of the undersigned people served on DHHIG boards in the past didn’t do whatever you are accusing DHHIG for not doing so.
I am taking the risk as I am disclosing my identity here and yet I still don’t know who CFDGE posters, including ‘CFDGE,’ are hiding behind their mask. This site is not being quite being fair and objective and whether or not it is accessible to all government agencies’ network system — many of us know that vlog or web media streaming based sites are not openly available on all federal government network system. I could be wrong any time soon since we all probably read that President Obama wants collaborative Web 2.0 technology to be openly available on federal government network system so maybe vlog sites are accessible soon. That would be fantastic!
Steve, I had a great pleasure knowing you politically, working with you and admiring your ethical well-being since we both work in similar background — contracting office.
I also had great pleasure knowing and working with Deborah. On the other hand, Steve, Deborah is not like you. She has all necessary qualities to be a consummate professional leader and respecting all people of all life regardless of any conflicted personal issues she dealt with in the past. Steve, know what? She does not accusing anyone being a “rat” like you did by condemning DHHIG in doing so.
Deborah leaves DHHIG in good hand. Unlike you, Steve, after you accepted board’s action on your mea culpa letter with set of proposed options (those were options you wrote in your letter), you then voluntarily agreed to step down from DHHIG; and you immediately lost my respect as a consummate leader after I found out you nearly destroyed all of your written posts and messages; and taking down the NTC web site that you gracefully donated to DHHIG. You erased nearly all your board members’ posts related to discussion of your committee works and that forum you created for your group. This is the leader DHHIG members looking for? Steve, I hope and pray you change to be a consummate professional and respecting all people of all life regardless of any conflicted personal issues you had to deal with in the past.
Steve, let me be blunt with you, I have no idea where you get this idea that DHHIG micromanaging NTC or why you are accusing DHHIG micromanaging NTC. No one enjoys working with someone who accusing other for “micromanaging” their works nor do anyone who enjoys working with someone who enjoys questioning other ethical conducts and reporting another person’s suspected or questionable wrongdoings to someone in authority.
You were clearly told to contact your agency’s Office of Ethics Office if you had any perceived issue between DHHIG and your job; instead you refused to follow the board’s suggestion and started snitching on some board members that causing DHHIG to stop its track and preclude them from going forward doing their jobs effectively.
Steve, I don’t know you personally, you seem to have the power to say anything you wish, you have the skill to write well — you are not omnipotent , et al BUT nothing is going to change the fact you did boastfully mention you are the “Captain” of your NTC ship and have all the good crew ready to run the ship WAY before the NTC 2009 committee was formally formed. It that transparency and being open to all members? Sounds like you will remain in reactive “Captain” all your life. So enjoy it while it lasts and a real Caption does not snitch on his own crew; and hopefully, your crew does snitch on you like you did with DHHIG board. Some one had snitched on me pretty good as I had no idea who did it as this happened the week after I found out about CFDGE web site.
I can only wish the best for DHHIG to continue its mission to coordinates and joins forces with EEOC, OPM, US Congress, White House, and the President and their successful world-class training program. I know OPM and other agencies think very highly of DHHIG and received numerous and countless positive feedback on DHHIG.
I am filled with regret or concern that it is beneath the dignity of the undersigned open letter group to form this site and making comments on this juvenile blather. But somebody needs to. You people should be ashamed! I sure hope that the government agencies and sponsors are not watching you or reading this site!
Thank you for reading my post.
March 18, 2009 at 4:50 am |
David,
I think your e-mail was uncalled for, I do not want to fill up anyone’s inbox. however I’ll provide my response and TRY to make it brief for everyone else here. But in the future, let’s cease from sending personal e-mails since they can be damaging to other people and this organization which I do not want to see. We can discuss this in person.
At this time, we really need to focus on how we can improve DHHIG. I want to be clear, that the people CC’ed don’t mean they are in or for CFDGE. Actually, it’s not a group, but a place where people can express their ideas and concerns freely.
I really like how you changed JFK’s quote, “So asks not what DHHIG can do for you, ask what you can do for DHHIG and all Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing federal employees.”
To respond to your letter:
1)You can call me “snitch” all you want, but I still believe I did the right thing and I was advised by someone at my Department to send an inquiry to the DOT IG office to ensure that DHHIG (and ourselves individually) will not get into any ethics trouble. If this situation happened again, I would do it again (I hope this would never happen again). I have apologized to DOT people that were affected by this, they all have forgiven me. You know, now the Obama administration is taking Ethics issue very seriously. We had a motion passed to have an OGE representative to give us advices, but no action was taken.
2)My NTC committee members felt that my dismissal from the board for what you call for “snitching” was unjustified and they decided to leave with me. Feel free to ask them to confirm this. I even encouraged them to replace me or be on committee for the next chair. They chose not to. All of our plans for the NTC were in “sketchy” version, with an exception for the budget. There was nothing to destroy or pass on with an exception for NTC contract with GUKCC which was given to John and Heidi. Any other documents should be in the DHHIG’s forum. I believe my sponsorship plan is still in your forum.
In all honesty, there was nothing to share in our NTC forum as many of us didn’t like using the forum; we did all of the planning face to face. Even Aaron, Gail and you were allowed in the forum, so there was nothing secretive.
I would like to add that, Ward Pettis has done an excellent job. I sent him an email few months ago telling him that I was impressed with his work and some of things he did, that I haven’t thought of such as sending RFPs for workshops. That would have taken the load off Socorro and Mark.
3)Micromanaging- maybe the board members don’t realize it but sometimes they do it (unintentionally). I’m sorry if you view this as a negative concern, but I didn’t make it a big deal. I thought my concern was ETHICS.
4)Yes, I offered the Board my 3 options to resolve the “snitch” issue, but I withdrew it. Unfortunately that message didn’t get across. I didn’t accept the decision but what was I to do? I was informed that it was final and there is nothing I can do.
5)I am sorry if you view CFDGE’s vlog as a negative thing, but I think it is a positive thing because now members have the opportunity to be vocal about any issues, since DHHIG doesn’t include members in any of the meetings. I just saw the election committee’s e-mail and I am very impressed with the number of the volunteer responses. It’s also a way to get message across without filling up people’s inbox like this e-mail.
6)I’m sorry about the anonymous comments but we cannot control their comments. We try to be positive as possible. Even John O and your comments are posted on the site. You would be surprised to see how many anonymous comments we received and most of them are negative or irrelevant to what is being talked about. The other purpose of the vlog was to see if we can generate a solution to the concerns. If you wish to discuss this more, I’ll be more than happy to discuss it in person or video phone.
7) I disagree with your example that “do employers reach you for jobs”. In jobs, the demand is higher for jobs, so people would apply themselves. But as for volunteers, the demand is very low, so we have to actively look and recruit volunteers as much as possible.
8)I honestly didn’t know DHHIG had forums for its general members, I thought it was only for Board members. Thank you for letting me know about this. Can you provide a link, maybe we can make it useful?
David, I beg you, let’s refrain from attacking each other, as the site has brought up a lot of issues as you pointed out that DHHIG needs work and I believe that by letting members in, it can help decrease the board’s workload. I would like to see everyone spend their energy to resolve those concerns and issues rather than focus on a specific person. I would be more than happy to discuss with you in person if you want to.
Thanks.
April 1, 2009 at 10:00 am |
[...] lady- summarized the 6, err. actually 7 points of concerns in our letter of concern; and the second- a man who talked about the response we received from the DHHIG board and that our current issues not [...]