Erika's sounding worried.
WAL-MART VS NEW ALBANY FIRST ...
... As they say: "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink!"
Seems the dementia is in an expansive phase, so rather than dwell on mysterious utterances connecting localism to the act of choking one's horse (or for that matter, chicken) while in the act of watering outside Hillary's big tent, let's focus on this important link to something that actually matters.
Walmart Watch seeks to hold Walmart fully accountable for its impact on communities, the American workforce, the retail sector, the environment and the nation's economy. Walmart Watch exists to challenge Walmart to more fully embrace its corporate responsibilities and live up to its position as the largest corporation in the United States.
11 comments:
I don't support Wal-Mart. I don't support the current NA 1st funding request, either. Two very different issues.
Jeff, I know your thoughts on the matter. Please feel free to post them if you wish. There are two sides to this, undoubtedly.
Two or more sides to most issues.
I have no problems with NA 1st requesting funds for specific programs that would benefit the community. Want to do a entrepreneurship training series? Fine. Figure out who the partners are, what the plan is, get solid cost estimates, and present it. I'd probably vote for it. The City provides X and the organization delivers Y.
Unfortunately, the current funding proposal is a lot different than that. A majority of the money requested is for salary, rent, and the like. There are no specific deliverables, only categories in which the organization might work.
On top of that, the business plan submitted to the council says multiple times that the organization plans to engage in advocacy with government to shape policy. Basically, if approved, taxpayers, not members, will be paying the organization to lobby elected officials.
I think that creates a conflict of interest that compromises the credibility of both government and the organization, putting us right back where we were with 1Si when so many of us (including council members) were complaining about precisely that sort of arrangement.
Those are very good points.
Much better points than the "can't fund them all so don't fund any of them" nonsense from Erika.
sans a staff person, fold your tent.
But Mike, Jeff has valid thoughts, to wit: If DNA requested this funding, we'd be going thermonuclear. Not that DNA's leadership lacks patronage sinecures -- that's another issue the newspaper won't cover.
Roger,
I didn't say Jeff's points didn't have some vality. But if you want a functioning organization serving an important and much needed purpose you are going to find funding for admin. This request is one way to do that.
This request opens a door that can have ramifications.
I am just making a point. If you want this or any organization to be operational then you must find a source of funding for staff. Sans staff to do the day-to-day scrut work that is required you might as well have no organization at all.
I have known many organizations who have governments contributing financially to their operations. And, with two exceptions I have never personally experienced the local units demand that a volunteer board take a specific position on any matter or conduct themselves in a specific manner.
As far as the advocacy point, I don't think it a conflict to accept this funding (especially since the council seems willing to give it). NA1 is going to advocate on behalf of the independent businessperson, not the city. Advocate purchasing collectively, locally and from independent businesses. I believe that is what Andy means by "advocacy".
This is the old argument that as a lobbyist I can buy the vote of a legislator for the cost of a steak dinner. First off, if that were the case someone else will just buy him a bigger steak.
Secondly, I believe our elected officials at the local, state and national levels for the most part are there to serve, not to manipulate or line their pockets. Of course there are always exceptions. Even after many years in this industry and some of the things I have experienced, I believe in the honor of the elected offical.
I also disagree that this question has to be submitted to the full membership. This is why nonprofits have boards of directors - to make decisions like this on behalf of the membership. That's why we have city and county councils and other elected officials - to make those same decisions for us in the public arena.
There is a gray area here, it needs to be found soon.
Wow Jeff, I never took for the kind to leave out pertenent information just to further your argument. The business plan actually says that we'll work with municipal government to help shape policy 'that avoids unfair policy practices such as subsidizing corporate competitors via tax breaks that community based businesses do not receive'.
As to asking for funding for particular projects, we are working on projects and seminars that will require funding, but until that time we need a dedicated director that can organize these things.
Furthermore, I would not have a problem with DNA asking for funding from EDIT if they presented the proper documentation and information required in the ordinance to make a request.
Why does everything have to be us against them? It's that attitude that is holding this city back.
What's fair or not, Marcey, is for the public to decide. When those entities ask for subsidies, laws, etc., they don't present them as unfair nor do they even necessarily believe them to be. What you say is unfair is to them the best way to do things. I'm not in favor of taxpayers footing the bill for their lobbying, either.
There are no doubt competing interests and conflicting viewpoints about economic development and many other issues. Even though I agree with the NA 1st viewpoint the large majority of the time, I don't think its fair for the government to financially support "my" lobbying efforts anymore than I do someone else's.
Post a Comment