|
|
Opinion: A voice of reason
by Dina Hitchcock, VP, Social Division, CHCA
Last week, I attended the executive committee meeting of the CHCA. I had
missed the November and December meetings, due to work responsibilities,
but, as VP of the Social Division, I sent my report to be read at the
meeting. When I left last Thursday’s meeting, I was dismayed, disheartened
and disillusioned.
Since the convening of the new board last May, both the executive and
board meetings have been marked by rudeness and outrageous behavior, both
on the part of board members and some members of the public, who chose
to attend. The board and executive committee are to be run under the aegis
of Roberts Rules of Order. Nothing could be further from the current reality.
We have many new, younger board members, with talents ranging from fundraising
and development, graphic design, advertising and law. I wonder —
I fear — what they must be thinking about now ... in terms of their
commitment to remain on the board. If they leave, we will lose a great
pool of talent.
I joined the board in 2001 when longtime family friend Maurice McCarthy
“twisted my arm.” He was concerned that I was spending too
much time worrying over my teenage son, who was, and is, his own son’s
best friend. He had become involved after his wife Donna had died in 1999,
a loss devastating to all of us who loved the family. I joined and soon
took over the position of secretary after Virginia Mallery resigned from
the position. This past spring, I was elected VP of Social, a position
I thought I would enjoy.
While Maurice was president, we dealt with a fair number of “sticky”
issues: contention between neighbors and the Methodist Church, the failure
of MacDonald’s to provide the grant to the CHCF negotiated by Maurice
himself, the wonderfully written series about teenage drinking on the
Hill, which very unfortunately featured the picture of someone NOT associated
with the article, and which led us to a legal situation. There were good
times as well: we raised over $100,000 in the CHCF drive in the fall of
2002, and we continued with the auction, at the Crefeld School, to raise
more money for the Fund. The Black and White gala is a spin-off of those
initial efforts.
Fast-forward to 2005. There is a minority, very vocal voice on the board
who have serious issues with some board actions. The majority of this
group (though not all) have not lifted a finger to do any fundraising,
aid with the Pastorius Park concerts or anything else in a positive vein.
It’s all negative … all nihilistic from what I can see.
So, for the record, let me state what I stand for:
1. Bylaws changes. I was a member of the Bylaws Committee in the spring
of 2004 when a number of changes were proposed. All of the changes were
published in the paper by then-editor Katie Worrall; open meetings were
held so that people who had concerns could make them known. I don’t
believe that anyone ever attended those open meetings. The changes were
voted into effect at the 2004 annual meeting.
To say that “people didn’t know what they were voting for”
is a ridiculous statement and doesn’t hold the CH public at large
in very high esteem, in terms of their intelligence. To say that “people
left the meeting before it was over and not enough voted”; Paul
Vallas was the speaker that year. If people couldn’t stay long enough
to listen to what the Philadelphia School Superintendent had to say, I
say, “oh well.” If anyone on the board now wants to make bylaws
changes of any type, the bylaws committee would have to be convened and
we would go through the same process we did in 2004.
2. The Hiram Lodge / development efforts. I’m a fiscally conservative
person, not with my own money, but with the CHCA and CHCF. I’m very
hesitant about funding anything that we don’t have the money for.
I’m concerned about our level of indebtedness. I say, sell 8431
Germantown Ave.; pay off all the bills and start with a clean slate. I
don’t know about Hiram Lodge (next door to 8431); I haven’t
seen a feasibility study as to how it might be reconfigured and to what
uses it might be made. To put it another way, I’m very hesitant
about CHCA as a landlord.
But an endowment would be nice. We rely, year to year, on the generosity
of the public to give grants to the Senior Center, Teenagers Inc, and
other worthy groups. If we don’t raise the funds, we cannot give
out the funds, and for that, I am sorry.
3. The Chestnut Hill Local. I can’t think of a person on the board
who doesn’t support First Amendment rights, the idea of free speech
for all. I was sorry when the former editor resigned. No one pressured
him; no one coerced him. It was his decision. We now have a new interim
editor. I had not met Carole when I read her first editorial. Like a lot
of people, on first reading, I thought, “oh, fluff ... wow.”
Then I got to thinking about it. I realized that if I were in that position
now, NO WAY would I come out swinging in my first month on the job. Better
to get the lay of the land, so to speak. So, when I read the editorial
two weeks ago, I thought “yeah, she’s saying what she thinks
... good and I hope she continues to do so.” Which brings me to
my next point: the CH Local’s Publisher’s Committee, a subject
that makes many members of the “opposition group” wring their
hands. “The Chestnut Hill Local Publisher’s Committee represents
the Publisher of the Chestnut Hill Local regarding the editorial, financial
and business management of the Chestnut Hill Local.” This is what
the bylaws state. Why do we have this committee at all, you may ask? Why?
Because in the past, the CHCA, the publisher of the Local, has been put
in a litigious situation, more than once. To the persons who decry this
committee, I would ask you, how would you deal with that litigation? Would
you rather give our hard-earned money for legal costs or would you rather
give it to the Senior Center or Teenagers Inc. The answer to that question
is a no-brainer for me.
The Local is not a tabloid; its purpose is not to denigrate community
members or merchants. It’s to inform the community about what’s
going on here and hopefully, check the facts first. Opinion? Sure, but
the Local is not a forum for week-after-week, letters from the same people,
blasting the CHCA. That’s not what the Lentz policy means to me.
The former editor himself decided not to publish a letter from me in May;
I wasn’t happy about it; but I had to respect and accept his decisions
as editor. For all of you out there, so intent on bashing our current
editor, I say, stand back, take breath and let her do her job.
Here’s the mission statement for the CHCA: “... goals include
a dedication to encouraging a sense of community in Chestnut Hill and
improving the quality of life in the community.”
On this, Martin Luther King Day, a day of service in this country, I
ask all board members, what is your part in attaining that goal?
|
|
