Today I received a response from the Ann Arbor Chamber of Commerce regarding their recommendations for the Workforce Development Board. Speaking with Kyle Mazurek, I was told that he was in attendance at the November 18 meeting of the BoC. As you may remember, this is the meeting where I chastised the Board for their behavior during Tom Partridge's commentry. This is where it all comes together...
After my comments, I was approached by several commissioners (Smith, Ping, Ouimet, Peterson, and Prater.) In addition to discussing my comments, I also discussed my application for the Community Action Board and Workforce Development Board. I explained that it was getting late and I would not be able to stay for the general meeting. Comm. Ping explained to me that the appointments would probably be tabled until the next meeting because the Ways and Means Committee meeting had run over.
In actuality, every committee appointment was voted on----with the exception of the two committees I applied for. Kyle Mazurek said that after the November 18 meeting, he decided to revoke my recommendation from the AACC because of my comments to the BoC. Prior to the meeting, I had been among those included in the recommendation letter.
At the December 2nd meeting, the appointments to the Community Action Board and Workforce Development Board were read and as you know, I was not appointed to either. Consequently, there is still one open seat on the Workforce Development Board, since my name had been removed from the AACC's recommendations (the other applicant had filed past the deadline, so was not eligible to be considered.)
Speaking with Jason Brooks about the Community Action Board, he said appointments are chosen with (county) department and individual Commissioner input. Because of this policy, at the general BoC meeting there is no debate. Instead, names that have already been selected are read for public record.
Regarding the decision of the Ann Arbor Chamber of Commerce, I understand that it is their decision to make. That being said, I wonder why only the one other board I applied for was the only other board tabled. Assuming that the AACC approached the BoCs during the break and requested that they table the decision on the WDB, it still leaves me to question why the decision was tabled for the CAB.
I'm probably reading too much into this, but I still can't help but wonder. All I wanted was to be involved. I guess now I am. But not in the constructive way that I wished.
12.04.2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
So the idea is to get on one of these committees, become known and then one day run for the board? Would that be the hope involved in this excercise?
ReplyDeleteI was involved in a committee from where I lived previously (Arlington, VA). I would say that these people on the committees were all very serious but I sure felt like a committee was no place to get anything done (like some of the Ann Arbor committees that frequently get trashed from the council).
I feel like I make more of difference coaching soccer and being a Cub Scout leader. At least they are fun.
So there, a sour grapes argument for you.
Thanks for your thoughts a2joe.
ReplyDeleteTruth be told, being on some boards was my way of dipping my toe into politics. I can't say what I would have done from there.
Same with this blog. I don't really know where I wan't to go from here, but I do know I would like for the average citizen to matter.
Does that mean I'll run for public office? Maybe or maybe not. I really have no clue at this point. I don't know what I hope to achieve at this point. I hope to figure that out. Keep in mind, I'm still (relatively) young. I'd like to think I have the luxory of indecision.
I'm sorry that happened, too. But I encourage you or anyone to participate in the life of the community by joining a committee. The cynical viewpoint expressed by the previous commenter saddens me.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why those two committees were delayed, but you must have upset some people. The Chair appoints based on input from other commissioners. On very rare occasions commissioners can vote to oppose the choice of the chair. In this case it appears that one or more commissioners prevailed on the chair to delay the appointments, or he decided to on his own.
If you were applying to a CofC designated slot, that may have created a problem. Those two committees especially have designated slots to represent various players. There are also at-large slots. You can probably find out by looking up the committees on the county website. Technically, if there were a C of C designated slot and they withdrew their nomination of you, the BOC may not have been able to fill that slot with you. I haven't looked it up to see whether that is the case.
Welcome to the real world of politics. I hope you learned a valuable lesson - your words matter. You said some things that offended the wrong people and in your case, the people who were supporting you in the first place.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteYou are correct. But thinking of it another way, those same people offended me with their behavior. We look to the BoC to make decisions based on what is best for the county, not based upon their egos. Should they be held to a higher standard? That is for you (and each voter) to decide.
Everything you said is correct. But what is "right" and what happens in the real world are two different things.
ReplyDeleteI hope to be part of the movement to bridge the gap between what is "right" and what happens in the real world. I'm just one person, but if more of us make the concious decision to exercise this in our own lives (and expect this from our elected officials) maybe things will begin to change. Perhaps I'm overly naive, but at least I'm trying. At this juncture in my life, that's all I can do. And if I veer off path, I hope someone will call me out on it. At least then I have the opportunity to make things right.
ReplyDelete