"A small group is engaging in an outrageous attempt to hijack a neighborhood association in the service of commercial special interests and their narrow political agenda."

I will respond to this statement. It is false.

It is neither "outrageous" nor a "hijack" to present an alternative slate. It is perfectly allowable under the bylaws to present an alternative slate and has occurred in the past.

There is absolutely no political agenda or commercial special interests represented or proposed by any of the second slate of candidates nor their supporters--and no evidence to back that allegation.

Nor are we "a small group."

Those of us who support the alternative slate, who are long-time residents and WECA members and former officers, know the truth and would not have mounted an alternative slate if we did not feel, after many years of dissatisfaction, that this is the right and proper step in the best interests of our community.

We look forward to the vote tomorrow night.

http://rockville.patch.com/blog_posts/west-end-residents-call-for-new-leadership-election-is-thursday

@Theresa - you say that there are no commercial special interests represented by anyone on your slate. Since you say you stand for transparency, why not disclose the fact that your candidate for president, Robin Nelson Corridon, is a member of the Pumphrey family (the family that owns and operates the Pumphrey Funeral Home). Or that three of the four people on your slate have been prominent lobbyists for the Pumphrey parking lot? If your slate were to be elected, it would be like a hostile takeover of WECA by a private company, in order to further its own business interests. How could such a group lead WECA with objectivity or impartiality?

You're joking, surely.

They are neighbors of the home whom who testified in support of the parking lot, just like other neighbors did, and other neighbors testified against, just like some members of the other WECA slate did.

The election is not about a parking lot or about Pumphrey's.

WECA members were split on the parking lot, so this is a non-starter.

To call any of them "prominent lobbyists" or "lobbyists" is just plain silly. People who are interested in the candidate and don't know them personally can read their bios.

Tom Weko here. I have not a shred of material interest in Pumphrey's Funeral Home. That decision has been taken by Mayor and Council and I consider it to be closed. I do care how the residents of the West End engage in the wider life of Rockville. I hope they do it without tiring accusations of self-interest and a sense of angry parochialism that have marked WECA in recent years. And I hope they will choose leaders who are willing to entertain a range of views -- fairly and openly, and with due process. That's all.

I am a resident who witnesses on a daily basis the impact of the congestion of traffic and parking on the street adjacent to Pumphrey's Funeral home. It was in that capacity that I spoke out, and not as a lobbyist for Pumphrey's. Although my vehicle and foot travel is inconvenienced regularly because of my proximity to the home, my concern, documented in the public record, was for the overall public health, safety and welfare. I object to being characterized as a lobbyist, and have much greater concerns about the West End and its representatives than simply the parking lot issue, which is why I seek to become more involved in the process.

Ms. Newhouse, if you had once ever bothered to come to a WECA meeting you could have asked for a copy of the by-laws, or made the suggestion that the by-laws be put on the website. Throughout the 40-year history of WECA, the bylaws have been readily available to anyone wishing to have them. The minutes are all online for anyone who would like to see them. The program for Thursday was distributed to the WECA listserve as well as delivered to every household in the West End. I wish I had the chutzpah to ask to be elected to office in an organization I had never even visited and knew very little about. I greatly admire the hard work of the current WECA officers for their earnest and tireless representation of the citizens of the West End, as well as their support of charitable causes. Each is widely known for impressive and longstanding contributions to the City of Rockville and its citizens. Your unfounded and venomous attacks on these outstanding people is reprehensible.

The agenda was not in the flyer or online; the newletter contained an announcement about the meeting but there was nothing other than the slate officers that I see, so I suppose that is the only business for this meeting? In fact I have been to a WECA meeting, and have even spoken at one, and I have not made any attacks on anyone, have I? I'll help with putting things online regardless of the outcome of the election.

There are problems with the agenda. The agenda is not always followed at the actual meeting when it is available, and there have been times when there was no agenda set before the meeting. This is another thing I have requested so we could get more members to attend, in the interest of transparency, and let them know what might be of interest to cause them to come to our meetings.

There are many improvements that could be made, and have been suggested, to improve the organization.

This is a wake-up call for our organization.

New leadership has a hope of being more responsive to such requests.

Thank you Theresa, Daryl and Tom for raising some valid question about how we run WECA. I share some of your concerns and thought it would be useful to provide some additional information and background.
As an organization, we are constantly evolving and strive to improve how we operate so we can best represent the views of the community. I have summarized your issues and will try to address each one.
1. Meeting agendas: Our meetings follow the standard agenda format every month as outlined by Roberts Rules of Order. We review the minutes from the previous meeting, committee heads present reports (i.e., the Treasurer’s report, Newsletter update), our Neighborhood Liaison Rocio Snowdy and Lt. Eric Over provide City and Police updates, we review any updates on old business and lastly discuss new business items. New business items are generally a mix of outside speakers on topics of interest to the neighborhood (i.e., we had the Mayor and Council attend last year’s General Membership meeting); groups wishing to present development ideas to the community (i.e., Jehovah’s Witness church who presented their plans for expanding their Hall); and issues that relate directly to the West End (i.e., a discussion of the I-270 soundwall). Meeting notices and reminders are provided by email to the Block Captains, to subscribers via our email listserv and on the WECA website. In addition, we provide a printed Newsletter twice/year with the agenda on the front page. (Cont.)

twice/year with the agenda on the front page. As our meetings follow the same format each month, we primarily include information on the new business items. Any resident is welcome to suggest agenda items. This month’s newsletter specifically indicates that in addition to the election, Susan Swift, Chief of Planning will be attending the meeting to review the status of various development projects in and around the West End. In addition, residents are welcome to bring up items that are not on the agenda at the meetings. Our meetings are open to any resident and we strive to foster open discussion of issues.

2. WECA Listserv: The idea of opening our listserv to residents to post and comment on items has been raised previously and discussed both by the Communications committee as well as at a meeting. It was decided that the listserv’s primary use is to disseminate information only. We do not have the manpower or resources to moderate discussions and/or postings. We pass along information we receive from the City as well as items provided by others. As a point in fact, Theresa you suggested we send out a message regarding a candidate’s forum for the Montgomery County Board of Education, which we did in March.

3. “Near constant victims of manipulation by email”: I’m not exactly sure what you are referencing. As a Block Captain, Theresa you should be receiving notices of meetings. We did have one situation where an issue came up over the summer (we generally do not meet in July and August) and we had a discussion about an issue via email. That particular issue was the Silverwood Project which a board member wanted WECA to take a stand on. In the end, the decision was made not to take a stand because there had not been enough discussion or time to properly review the issue and form a position. This also led to a wider discussion at our November meeting over how we will evaluate possible positions WECA might take as well as how to notify residents of issues that might warrant a stand by WECA. The decision was made to NOT take any positions on issues unless the block captains and membership were notified in advance that a vote may be taken and to provide supporting information on the issue in question (with points on both sides). You may not be aware of this change in our approach as you did not attend this meeting.

4. This leads me to my last point. During my Presidency, we have been very careful about how we decide which issues to take stands on and have been very reluctant to take a stand where there is not a clear consensus (unlike the City’s Branding Project, which was unanimously opposed). When I was first elected in June of 2009, the organization was still reeling from the divisiveness caused by the position taken on the Bealls Grant II project. Much of this discord was a direct result of a lack of transparency by WECA then led by former President Patricia Woodward. At a meeting attended by a small group (9 individuals, including Robin Nelson Corridon), the decision was made to write a letter to the City supporting this project. This decision was based on inaccurate information and without fully gauging the feelings of the neighborhood as a whole, which turned out to be very divided on the issue.

As a result of this debacle we’ve moved with great deliberation (to the dismay of some who would like to see us take more stands) and our stands have generally been related to HOW projects move through the city. Witness the Victory Housing project – WECA did not take an official stand on this issue, but we did testify about the process and worked to change City procedures to allow greater citizen participation. This is also the reason why we did not take a stand on the Pumphrey’s text amendment – there was no clear consensus. Of course, any resident (including board members) is (are) free to express their own personal feelings in testimony before the city.

This is a long post and I hope residents who read this will have a greater understanding of the charter of WECA and how we operate to bring all residents into WECA and what our goals and concerns are for our neighborhood.
Respectfully,

Susan Prince
President, West End Citizen’s Association

There is no way I can respond to the massive volume here (perhaps that was the point), as much as many, many points can be rebutted. However, this part is a rewrite of history and an attempt to smear Mrs. Woodward and Ms. Corridon. It speaks volumes that you felt the need to state the following:

"Much of this discord was a direct result of a lack of transparency by WECA then led by former President Patricia Woodward. At a meeting attended by a small group (9 individuals, including Robin Nelson Corridon), the decision was made to write a letter to the City supporting this project. This decision was based on inaccurate information and without fully gauging the feelings of the neighborhood as a whole, which turned out to be very divided on the issue."

See you this evening.

It was obvious that last nights process was rigged. WECA is nothing more than a dictatorship with automatons as members. We will control WECA the next time around. For now, Twinbrook looks ripe for the picking.

George, please email me at tdefino@aol.com.

I must admit that WECA's core leaders are always impressively effective at "rallying the troops" to quickly mobilize large numbers of their members to show up and follow orders. It would be a wonderful thing if they could harness that energy and motivation to actually do something constructive.

Susan, in your lengthy response, why did you fail to correct the statements that the alternative slate was an "outrageous attempt to hijack the election" in this post when you know that is false?

Did you approve this post by the Shipleys, which you know makes false claims? Did the other members of the WECA slate approve of this false post?

The bylaws allow for an alternative slate. Contrary to how you ran the meeting on Wednesday they also allow for a written ballot. Were you all so afraid of losing that you had to manipulate members in this way? None of this will be pass without objections.