[statecom-discuss] Fwd: [spwg-discuss] Message from Chuck Turner

[David Rolde]

>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Turner, Chuck" <Chuck.Turner at cityofboston.gov>
> To: "Discussion List for Strategic Plan Working Group" <
> spwg-discuss at green-rainbow.org>, "Discussion List for Strategic  
> Plan Working
> Group" <spwg-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 18:23:16 -0400
> Subject: RE: [spwg-discuss] Grouping of the Strategic Objectives
> Dear All,
>
> I am piggy backing since I couldn't figure how to use the spwg-- 
> discuss.
> This should be viewed as a formal letter of resignation from the SPWG.
>
> As I outlined at the meeting, there are a number of concerns that I  
> have
> with the approach being taken that I outlined at the meeting:  
> Briefly: While
> I don't consider myself an expert on the development of strategic  
> plans, I
> have participated in a few and have always used goals as a driving  
> force. I
> think one of the reasons why what we have on paper seems very  
> confusing is
> that there has been no discussion of goals for the two year plan.
>
> Another concern is that there is a major economic crisis facing  
> people of
> all races and income categories from "middle class" down. Yet,  
> despite all
> the objectives, very few speak to this concern.
>
> A third concern is the fact that the objectives are not specific,
> measurable, and achieveable from my perspective.  They are a wish  
> list that
> I believe is unrealistic.
>
> One might argue that I should stay to talk the issues through.  
> However, it
> became very clear that no one wanted a substantive discussion about
> direction. In fact, one member accused me of attacking people when as
> Merelice pointed out neither I nor anyone else focused on any  
> person. The
> reason for this projection I believe is that any attempt to suggest  
> there
> may be another way approaching the plan is in fact viewed as a  
> personal
> attack.
>
> However, almost every person indicated at some point that they felt  
> that no
> progress was being made as I raised my concerns. In fact, one  
> person one
> half hour into the May 6th discussion said in effect "Finally we  
> are moving
> forward".  Given that perspective I am comfortable resigning rather  
> than
> participate in the development of a plan whose framework has  
> already been
> decided and be viewed as a disruptive influence.
>
> Chuck
>
> P.S. I am really not interested in discussing the issue further. I  
> wish you
> luck and will await the completion of the strategic plan.
>
> ------------------------------