[Mpls] PPERRIA Votes to Continue Excluding Students

[Michael Atherton]

I'm toying with the idea that there is always a point
where politics degrades into farce.  I suspect that 
this point exists whenever attempts to spin the facts become 
so unbelievable that no one except the spinners themselves
believe what they are saying. 
  
Steve Cross wrote:

> Just for the record, Michael Atherton is a member of the 
> Board of Directors of PPERRIA.  He, as I do, feels that 
> it is vital for students to participate in PPERRIA.  So, 
> how did Director Atherton vote at the meeting on this issue
> that he thinks is crucial?

First off, the only reason I am a PPERRIA board member is
by default. In the last election one or two people voted for 
me and I lost of course, but because of a quirk in the Bylaws, 
if a board member resigns then the person with the next highest 
vote total automatically replaces them. (I think that this was
intended as a way to lockup the Board membership, but backfired).

The funny part is that no one ever notified me that I was on the 
Board.  I didn't find out until I questioned who was currently 
on the Board at a meeting.  "Oh, you're a member of the Board." 
Great!  Is this ridiculous yet? Apparently, there were also others
who were Board members, but were unaware of it. I have always 
been ambivalent about being on the Board, but have not resigned 
because of the slight possibility that the position might actually 
be able to help me make PPERRIA a more ethical and inclusive
organization.  Pretty funny, no?

> ANSWER: He voted to ABSTAIN.
> 
> On a change in the bylaws, a fixed number of votes (27 of the 
> 40 directors)is required to adopt the amendment.  His vote to 
> "abstain" is, consequently, procedurally effectively the same 
> as voting "no."  I would suggest that there is hypocrisy in his 
> public complaint on this Board about a failure to pass an amendment 
> when he effectively voted "no" when given the opportunity.
> (Naturally, he has his reasons for abstaining and I suspect 
> that he will presently announce to all why he abstained.)  

Hypocrisy?  It's interesting that Mr. Cross fails to mention that
he helped author the bylaw changes that excluded students and clearly 
detailed their intent. He also fails to mention that he has recently 
stated that one justification for changing the bylaws to include 
students is that not doing so would be a political liability for 
*whoever* happens to run for City Council from this ward.  
Paul Zerby, in a change of position, says that he now supports 
including students.    

So you ask, why did I abstain?  I have not voted at a PPERRIA
meeting since they changed the bylaws (three or four years
ago), so that ONLY the votes of Board members are binding. 
This issue has been discussed previously on this List.  In
effect, if the public votes don't go their way, the Board members
can call for a vote of the Board only and overrule whatever has been 
publicly decided.  So, I don't vote as a protest and I publicly 
announced this when I spoke in favor of the motion to allow students
to become members at the meeting we are discussing.

What's really ironic, is that during the meeting people were
openly discussing the fact that even if students could join
they won't be able to do anything, because the bylaws ultimately
give all of the power to the Board.  

> Nevertheless, he didn't help with an "aye" vote himself when 
> he had the opportunity.  

> The vote was 18 in favor of the amendment, 10 opposed, and 2 
> abstentions. Another 10 were not present.  So, while the 
> majority voting favored the amendment, it still failed because 
> an absolute majority was required.  I point out the numbers 
> because I think that it does show that a majority of PPERRIA 
> members really welcome the students.  That view unfortunately failed
> to become part of the bylaws because the super-majority 
> wasn't achieved.  We will try again to achieve that super-majority.  
> Maybe next time, Mr. Atherton might actually vote with us.

No, I will continue to ABSTAIN until PPERRIA becomes truly
democratic again.  Even if I had voted it wouldn't have given
students any power, it would have just provided the illusion of
power.

I think all of this is extremely ironic because I believe that
PPERRIA instituted their bylaw changes to consolidate power
in a response to a challenge by neighborhood residents
to question the legitimacy of their street-light petition.  
Now, even when they want to, they can't give their organization 
even the illusion of being inclusive.  It's a farce.

Michael Atherton
Prospect Park