Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown
Some of you don’t really seem to understand how civic nonprofits like FotP work, so you’re misinterpreting what you’re seeing in newspaper reports.
FotP has a large volunteer board, and has a few fulltime staff, including a relatively new executive director. The executive director of such an organization is always walking a tightrope: expected to show leadership but also expected to take policy direction from the board. A board discussion about "what’s the right strategy regarding LMNA?" broke into an embarrassing news story a couple of weeks ago, leading some reporters to say that FotP had caved on the lawsuit. Instead, what appears to have happened was that the board directed Irizarry to make a list of what the group should try to get if there is ever an opportunity for negotiation.
She did so, and a couple of board members leaked it to the press. It’s not much different than if someone on the Chicago Teachers Union negotiating committee leaked emails regarding “what we should ask for in our next contract.” Board members of do-gooder organizations often have different ideas on strategy; they don’t always have the sealed lips of corporate boards or mayoral appointees. It’s just silly to say that a good-government group like FotP looks bad because they didn’t muzzle their board.
Once the Tribune published the memo, FotP decided it was better to own up to it on Facebook than to look silly trying to deny it. So they simply posted the Tribune story, saying “If they want to trade, here are our terms. Out in the open.” The post includes this odd third-party language: “The parks preservation group identified six points to discuss with the mayor’s office and the team working to bring the museum to Chicago, according to the memo.” Remember that FotP has never released the memo and has declined to comment on it. So it’s also ridiculous for the Park District to complain that they didn’t get a copy before the Tribune published a leaked internal memo. How exactly was Irizarry supposed to prevent a board member from leaking the document?
FotP has always had a delicate relationship with the park district, from the days when FotP were the annoying do-gooders pointing out that Ed Kelly’s thousands of patronage employees weren’t actually doing the work/holding the classes they claimed to be. Relations have been much better in recent years, but the park district will always view any watchdog group as an unneeded annoyance, just as the city council doesn’t want anyone investigating its behavior.
|
Good God. No, you don't know how non-profits should work. Nearly all non-profit boards are comprised of volunteers, that is the norm and not unique to FOPL. As a former non-profit director and board member for another non-profit, FOPL is an embarrassment and a joke when it comes to non-profit governance, long term strategy, and communications. If the board was properly run and managed (assuming each board member had an equal vote), then a split board would mean, according to most by-laws, that the lawsuit should not proceed. The fact that the lawsuit is still around, and the numerous contrarian statements, suggests the organization is personality driven by one or two, or a handful, of loud individuals who have more sway than they should have, and that textbook governance procedures are not practiced. A media leak suggests dissenting opinions are muzzled at meetings. Like many weaker non-profits, FOPL may be suffering from founder's syndrome or other personality issues, where plurality views are overridden by entrenched board members who have the backing of one or two large donors or other people.
Your post, like all of your other defenses of this pathetic organization, minimizes the larger issues with the organization. This leak wasn't an aberration or one-off thing, the totality of the circumstances and all we've seen from FOPL this past year strongly suggests it's a joke of an organization that only appears to be competent because it can file lawsuits, such competence being solely the result of the attorney and not anyone in the organization. Media leaks, complete unwillingness to speak to the press by the executive director, and no public engagement strategy is not the hallmark of a professionally run organization--especially one that has full time staff.
Prev
Linear Mode
