Part 2/3

[Diane comments: I was double checking the 10 day rewrite rule]

From: Sherri

Date: 9/15/2009 6:21:46 PM

To: Mike & Diane; Scott Burow

Subject: RE: P.S.

I would say that the 10 days would apply, Diane. I’d suggest, though, that you have some sort of confirmation that the request to rewrite was received – a delivery or read receipt, if possible (just thinking ahead on my part <g>).

Sherri

From: Mike & Diane

Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:45 PM

To: Scott Burow; Sherri Bradley

Subject: P.S.

Would this be the same?

If rejected, the member filing the grievance shall be informed that the grievance was not accepted and the reasons that it was not accepted. If the reason that the grievance was not accepted was due to the initial complaint not fulfilling the requirements of subsection C of this Section, the member will have 10 days to amend or correct any deficiencies in the initial complaint and resubmit it to the Grievance Committee Chair.

I overlooked it trying to find it previously. I assume this will fall into us just asking them to rewrite it de to it being hard to follow and info being contained within the grievance that isn't applicable to the GC being able to handle it.

Sorry I can't be more specific...

Diane

==============================

[Diane comments: Forwarding the rewrite request again. Note it is going to the SAME address. Tina lied during the hearing held by the AB against Fran and Dennis...hmmm what will the AB do with this information? Sweep it under the rug of course like they do everything else. Bet they come after me instead! LOL]

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 9/15/2009 7:53:59 PM

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Joel Newport

Subject: Fw: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

I am forwarding a message I sent to you on September 10th to make sure you received this. If this is the first time receiving it please let me know. According to the GC bylaws you have 10 days to resubmit this grievance. So, we will need to receive it on or before September 20th.

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

CC: Joel Newport

Grievance Committee Assistant Chair

-------Original Message-------

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 9/10/2009 11:16:01 AM

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Joel Newport

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

We are having an extremely hard time reading and understanding your Grievance. Could you please rewrite it and include:

A. Full name & project affiliation of the member bringing the complaint;

b. Full name & project affiliation of the member the complaint is against;

c. The exact nature of the complaint, including the date that the incident occurred;

d. What steps or actions the member has taken to this point, if any, to resolve the situation outside of the grievance process;

e. What actions/reparations that the project member desires as a result of the grievance;

f. A specific citation or reference to the USGenWeb Project Policy, Procedure, or By-Law, or XXGenWeb Project, Policy, Procedure, or By-Law Which alleged to have been violated.

Also, please exclude anything that includes the hacking, copyright Violations, etc because those are not something we handle. Those have to be Taken up through other alternatives. We cannot get info based on Federal Investigations, so all of the info dealing with this aspect and the Copyright issues have to be removed from the grievance.

This grievance will be placed on hold until we get the corrected information

Also, do not BCC or CC anyone (other than Joel or I) with the emails we will share back and forth. If this is done it is a violation of the GC procedures up to and including our confidentiality and we will not be able to continue on with this grievance due to the breaking of our bylaws and rules.

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

CC: Joel Newport ~ Grievance Committee Assistant Chair

==============================

[Diane comments: Discussion that she had until Sept 20th to refile...not the 25th!]

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 9/15/2009 8:04:24 PM

To: campaign98@rootsweb.com

Subject: Re: [GC] Grievance 2009/08-15

If she doesn't re-file by September 20th it will be rejected. As of now just leave the status blank. I sent a message through the archived list yesterday stating that it was on hold waiting for a rewrite. I also resent the message a few minutes ago letting her know of the 10 days to get the rewrite to us. I haven't seen hide nor hair of her on any of the mailing lists lately. (which is extremely strange!)

Diane

==============================

[Diane comments: We finally get a read receipt

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 9/15/2009 8:19:24 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Read: Grievance 2009/08-15

This is a receipt for the mail you sent to

"Laverne Tornow" at 9/15/2009 7:53 PM

This receipt verifies that the message has been displayed on the recipient's computer at 9/15/2009 8:19 PM

==============================

[Diane comments: Now Laverne tells me that the legal date is 10 days from the 15th...not the 10th like it is supposed to be. Is she now on the GC or AB to tell me when the rewrite is due? Oh wait...she is in Sherri’s clique so she can get away with anything!]

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 9/15/2009 8:22:13 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

This is the first communication I have received regarding this, as such today is the legal date of notification it would be 10 days from today.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike & Diane

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Joel Newport

Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 7:53 PM

Subject: Fw: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

CC: Joel Newport

Grievance Committee Assistant Chair

-------Original Message-------

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 9/10/2009 11:16:01 AM

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Joel Newport

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

We are having an extremely hard time reading and understanding your Grievance. Could you please rewrite it and include:

A. Full name & project affiliation of the member bringing the complaint;

b. Full name & project affiliation of the member the complaint is against;

c. The exact nature of the complaint, including the date that the incident occurred;

d. What steps or actions the member has taken to this point, if any, to resolve the situation outside of the grievance process;

e. What actions/reparations that the project member desires as a result of the grievance;

f. A specific citation or reference to the USGenWeb Project Policy, Procedure, or By-Law, or XXGenWeb Project, Policy, Procedure, or By-Law which alleged to have been violated.

Also, please exclude anything that includes the hacking, copyright violations, etc because those are not something we handle. Those have to be taken up through other alternatives. We cannot get info based on Federal Investigations, so all of the info dealing with this aspect and the copyright issues have to be removed from the grievance.

This grievance will be placed on hold until we get the corrected information

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

CC: Joel Newport ~ Grievance Committee Assistant Chair

==============================

[Diane comments: More proof that the 20th should have been the cutoff date for the rewrite!]

From: sburow@swbell.net

Date: 9/16/2009 9:08:44 AM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Re: Question for you

Hi Diane:

Sorry for the delay, I've been on the road. Greetings from Kansas City!

It depends on what you mean by 'resubmit'. If this is an original grievance that has not been previously heard and the initial filing was defective, then ten days from the date that the original grievance was rejected.

If this is a refiling or a request for reconsideration of a previously heard grievance, then it should be rejected outright. The final word is the final word and re-do's were not contemplated.

Scott

From: Mike & Diane

Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:42:06 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)

To: Scott Burow; Sherri Bradley

Subject: Question for you

Scott & Sherri,

What is the time limit to resubmit a grievance? I don't see it in the bylaws and I am not 100% positive on it. I had to ask someone to rewrite and reword their grievance based on information being included that we have no control over. I have not heard back from this person and didn't know what kind of a time limit to give them. Basically the only time limits is 45 days to file after the offense happens and 72 hours for summations when in mediation and/or arbitration. Nothing is specific on re-filings.

Any ideas or suggestions?

Thanks!

Diane

==============================

[Diane comments: And as you see we get it on the 25th, 5 days late, or by Laverne’s terms on time...who is right?]

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 9/25/2009 2:16:53 AM

To: Mike & Diane

Cc: Joel Newport

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

I am asking for a review and arbitration of the actions taken by the FLGenWeb Project, Inc., board of directors against me as FLGenWeb has no Greivance system in place. The FLGenWeb Inc. 501 (c) 3 application narrative says:

[Diane comments: Rest snipped. So, she we have accepted this or not?]

==============================

[Diane comments: Offered to set up the mailing list, but Oh no, Sherri wasn’t having that...]

From: Sherri

Date: 10/11/2009 6:03:12 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: RE: Mediation mailing list

I will - give me a bit, I need to make sure which are available.

Sherri

-----Original Message-----

From: Mike & Diane

Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 5:17 PM

To: Sherri Bradley

Subject: Mediation mailing list

Sherri,

Can you have a mailing list set up for the mediation of Grievance 2009/08-15 or should I attempt it? <g>

Thanks!

Diane

> I've got it set up, who needs to be subbed? (I set it us as

> a yahoo group, but it's private so won't be seen by everyone

> and I have to approve subscriptions, so those not authorized

> can't get in where they don't belong.)

> I need email addresses to approve, but they can subscribe by

> sending a message to grievance-mediation-

> subscribe@yahoogroups.com I think that will speed it up so

> they can get up and going quicker.

> Sherri

==============================

[Diane comments: Had to snip some of this one because she did put for my eyes only but I wanted you to see this part]

I'd also have to check to see if mediators and/or arbitrators have to be approved by the AB like the slate of committee members is.

Sherri

==============================

[Diane comments: Florida questioning the date of acceptance of the grievance...are they right?]

From: name removed

Date: 10/16/2009 2:22:38 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Cc: name removed

Subject: RE: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Hi Diane --

Would you please take a look at the Rules of USGenWeb, dealing with Grievances?

There are some rather specific "statutes of limitation" periods.

If we look at the "Greivance" below, we see that an action is stated to have occurred on August 10. We also see that the "Greivance" was filed on September 25.

This is on precisely the 46th day after the "Removal" occurred.

There are two periods of time in

USGenWeb STANDARD RULES

Section 5A - Grievance Process

The grievance process is initiated when a complaint is made by any of the following:

a. A member of the USGenWeb Project, filing on his/her own behalf, within 45 days of incident, or discovery of incident;

b.A former USGenWeb member within 14 days of termination of membership either with the Project, or within a specific State or Special Project;

So, applying these rules.

Simply, applying "b" the complaint had to be filed by the close of August 24.

We don't even need to get into "a", because this was filed on a person's own behalf, and unless Laverne is also a member of another USGenWeb Project, this cannot be applicable. But, even if "a" was to apply, the complaint needed to be filed by the close of September 24.

++++++++

Assuming you find these timing rules to be not applicable, and with my tax representation background, "limitations rules" are totally inflexible and absolute, then you may proceed on your own, with this called to your attention to advise Laverne Tornow that the filing cannot be accepted and acted upon.

I and the other members named in the "Greivance" will expect your prompt notice that the "Greivance" has been declined due to the length of time from the complained of action and the filing of the "Greivance."

Thanks

name removed

==============================

[Diane comments: Rejection of first mediator]

From: dennis gries

Date: 10/17/2009 4:25:04 PM

To: txarchives@mac.com; Franmuse@aol.com; bay@flgenweb.net; PMcSwain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; mikeflood301@yahoo.com

Cc: Mike & Diane

Subject: RE: Grievance 2009/08-15 - Mediation Process

Dorman --

Please note that at least I, and I believe my fellow Board members, have repeatedly announced that Florida operates as a corporation, and that any procedure must be done as a filing against the Florida Corporation. Individual officers and directors cannot be named. This is basic corporate law. I am responding, not on the merits or demerits of the Grievance, but on the process.

I do not speak for the entire group, but for myself personally, and I respectively reject you for the reasons clearly stated just above and in the cut and paste from the latest email to Diane Siniard.

I strongly encourage you to read this email just below, including what is a chance for a procedural compromise, and get any prior emails from me to Diane, as the entire process, other than receiving a Grievance from Laverne, is out of order. She did name the Corporation, and the USGW has ignored this, and any measure of Corporation law.

dennis

Diane ---

Again, I/we point your attention to the clear wording by Laverne below that "I am asking for a review and arbitration of the actions taken by the FLGenWeb Project, Inc., board of directors..."

That is an explicit acknowledgement that the actions were a corporate action.

The attempt by USGW to name any of us individually, without naming the entire Board and the Corporation is an improper legal or administrative action and inconsistent with Laverne's filing. The Board of this Florida Corporation acted, and I believe that any recourse is strictly in the Courts of the State of Florida as we have acted within our corporate authority within our Bylaws and the State of Florida Corporation laws.

Laverne clearly and correctly copies from our 501c3 application where we state that we are unit of the USGW as we are not owned or controlled by the USGW. We needed to do that as the USGW logo appears on our home pages, and we were concerned about an IRS query about USGW. Had this logo not appeared, no reference would have been made.

Also, I received notice that my name/email address was entered into a Yahoo Group. I did not authorize it, and either you or I need to remove it.

I personally am troubled that Laverne does not appear to have asked us at the FLGWP Inc. to promptly effect a Grievance procedure, but rather chose to go to the USGWP. Unofficially speaking for the FLGWP Inc., I have drafted a Grievance procedure now before our BOD, and I personally hope to expedite its approval by our BOD. Once in place, we expect to advise Laverne that is in place, and her USGWP filed grievance is before the panel, and we invite any additional submissions. Within a rather brief period of time, since we as a BOD are familiar with the issues, there will be further discussions, and I assume that there will be a vote on the Grievance, i.e. to accept it and provide relief to Laverne, or to affirm the previous action.

If the previous action is affirmed, I believe that if we follow our procedures, then there can be no effective plea to the USGWP, and this will close this matter. Certainly, a state that does not have a process in place must be allowed to immediately put one in place to help solve the previous omission.

This may be a way that all parties can feel that their separate formalities are observed.

Please let us know your/USGWP comments on this.

==============================

[Diane comments: Notice that all mediators will be rejected by Florida]

From: Dorman Holub

Date: 10/17/2009 5:55:43 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Fwd: Grievance 2009/08-15 - Mediation Process

3rd reply from Mr. Gries.

Dorman Holub

Begin forwarded message:

From: dennis gries

Date: October 17, 2009 4:52:26 PM CDT

To: Dorman Holub

Subject: RE: Grievance 2009/08-15 - Mediation Process

Darn formalities.

But, I will only continue to reject each mediator until the Corporation is named, and not me personally.

-----Original Message-----

From: Dorman Holub

Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 5:12 PM

To: dennis gries

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15 - Mediation Process

Nothing personal is noted, Dennis.

I emailed everyone the original email as I emailed you.

I have sent an email to the GC chair designating that you have rejected me as a mediator.

As per the by-laws of the GC, if only one of the parties rejects the mediator, a second mediator will need to be chosen.

Dorman Holub

On Oct 17, 2009, at 4:01 PM, dennis gries wrote:

Nothing personal, Dorman. I'm sure that you are a wonderful, sincere person.

Please note, that this rejection is only be me, and assuming you have emailed the others, they may respond differently, although we have discussed the Corporate issues, and I believe that we may respond consistently, esp. since the rest of the group was copied on my initial response to you.

If this ever moves forward with the FL Corporation being named, as Laverne did, perhaps we will be working together.

However, we also are seeking to look to the objectives of the USGW, and create a Grievance Panel, and seek to have Laverne go forward with us, which is the intent of the USGW, i.e. a State Grievance Panel in place.

Yours

Dennis Gries

-----Original Message-----

From: Dorman Holub

Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 4:39 PM

To: dennis gries

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15 - Mediation Process

Dennis,

I appreciate your email.

I will email Diane Siniard that you have rejected me as a mediator.

Dorman Holub

On Oct 17, 2009, at 3:24 PM, dennis gries wrote:

Dorman --

dennis

Diane ---

Again, I/we point your attention to the clear wording by Laverne below that "I am asking for a review and arbitration of the actions taken by the FLGenWeb Project, Inc., board of directors..."

That is an explicit acknowledgement that the actions were a corporate action.

Also, I received notice that my name/email address was entered into a Yahoo Group. I did not authorize it, and either you or I need to remove it.

This may be a way that all parties can feel that their separate formalities are observed.

Please let us know your/USGWP comments on this.

==============================

[Diane comments: Me going to Sherri about breach of confidentiality in Florida]

Sherri,

We have a serious problem and possibly a breach of confidentiality made by FlGenWeb in the current grievance.

I would like to ask that the FlGenWeb board members be found members not in good standing. They are stating they are exempt from the USGenWeb bylaws, rules and procedures and will not follow them nor abide by them. It has been stated they will reject any mediator we find to handle the grievance and that they are going to pursue that Laverne go to them to resolve this grievance and that they will be letting the FlGenWeb Project know what is contained in the grievance, etc.

I will start forwarding emails to you from this Dennis Gries stating these facts and more.

If I need to approach the entire AB about this let me know and I will draw up an email asking fro FlGenWeb board members be found members not in good standing fro failure to abide by USGenWeb Project rules, bylaws and procedures.

Diane

==============================

From: Sherri

Date: 10/17/2009 8:04:59 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: RE: 3rd Qtr GC Report

Thanks, Diane.

As for the mess with FLGenWeb, FLGenWeb creating a Grievance Process AFTER THE FACT THEY WERE NAMED IN A GRIEVANCE doesn't qualify as the state having a process. That process would have had to be in place BEFORE the action was taken. Obviously, creating one now and forcing Laverne's grievance to be handled by it will make a mockery of the procedure - you know it's going to be stacked in favor of FLGenWeb, and Laverne will NEVER get a fair shake. Although, why, after all of this, she'd want to go back is beyond me - sort of like Don Kelly in IA.

Let me think on the rest of your questions - will get back to you by tomorrow night. I'm working all day again tomorrow, so am heading to bed before very long tonight.

Thanks,

Sherri

-----Original Message-----

From: Mike & Diane

Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 7:50 PM

To: Sherri Bradley

Subject: Re: 3rd Qtr GC Report

Please edit if necessary in light of the complaints received on the last report.

Diane

-------Original Message-------

From: Sherri

Date: 10/16/2009 5:52:49 AM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: 3rd Qtr GC Report

Please send the 3rd Qtr GC report when you get a chance.

Thanks,

Sherri

==============================

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 10/17/2009 11:36:22 PM

To: Franmuse@aol.com; bay@flgenweb.net; PMcSwain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; mikeflood301@yahoo.com; dennis gries

Cc: Joel Newport

Subject: RE: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Dennis & All,

Again to remind you, in light of the fact that FLGenWeb IS in fact a member of the USGenWeb (per the logo on the home page of the FlGenWeb site as well as the counties contained therein) ALL bylaws, rules and procedures MUST be adhered to. I refer you to:

Article XII State Projects Section 3. It shall be the responsibility of each state organization to ensure that the state project is in compliance with the stated bylaws of The USGenWeb Project.

Section 5. State projects are empowered to develop/adopt any additional rules/bylaws and guidelines, as appropriate, for their state so long as they do not conflict with these bylaws. State projects shall be highly encouraged to develop and adopt rules/bylaws that cover grievance procedures within the state.

FLGenWeb creating a Grievance Process AFTER THE FACT THEY WERE NAMED IN A GRIEVANCE doesn't qualify as the state having a process. That process would have had to be in place BEFORE the action was taken. Therefore USGenWeb Grievance Committee and Procedures MUST be adhered to.

As for contacting Mrs Tornow to file a grievance with FLGenWeb after an official USGenWeb grievance has already been filed, I would advise you to NOT do so. Any communications between FLGenWeb and Mrs Tornow should be done through me at this point in the process.

As for rejecting the mediator we had assigned, as well as stating that you will continue to reject each mediator we assign is hindering the grievance process.

I also note that I have not received any word from anyone named in this grievance that you are their spokesperson. You state in some emails that you are the spokesperson for the group and in others you state that you do NOT speak for the entire group. I don't know if you are speaking for the entire group all of the time, part of the time, or just when it suits the needed purpose. In light of this fact I need to hear from each person named in this grievance as to whether you are their spokesperson or not.

I also note that you have stated that you have discussed this grievance with the FLGenWeb board which includes people NOT named in the grievance which is a blatant violation of the Grievance Committee Procedures: Section 5F-Grievance Process: All discussion regarding the issues during the grievance process is to be considered privileged and private, and shall not be disclosed during or after the process by either the team or either party, except as allowed by these procedures.

Therefore you are guilty of violating this section of the USGenWeb Grievance Committee Procedures which are found under Section V Grievance Procedures under the USGenWeb Standard Rules which are included in the USGenWeb bylaws.

I also note that you are trying to push for a re filing of this grievance. Again I bring your attention to:

Section 5C-Grievance Process

The following types of grievances will be handled by the Grievance Committee: D. Grievance by a USGenWeb Project member against another USGenWeb Project member located within the same State or Special Project when there is no local Grievance Procedure to follow in that State or Special Project.

The grievance will stand as it was filed and the 6 named will be required to continue with the USGenWeb Grievance Process as stated in the Grievance Committee Procedures.

As for being subscribed to the mailing list for this grievance, I would ask that you do stay subscribed until this grievance is complete.

I hope this explains things a little more clearly.

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

CC: Joel Newport Grievance Committee Co-Chair

-------Original Message-------

From: Dennis gries

Date: 10/17/2009 12:54:49 PM

To: Mike & Diane; Franmuse@aol.com; bay@flgenweb.net; PMcSwain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; mikeflood301@yahoo.com

Cc: Dennis gries

Subject: RE: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Diane ---

Again, I/we point your attention to the clear wording by Laverne below that "I am asking for a review and arbitration of the actions taken by the FLGenWeb Project, Inc., board of directors..."

That is an explicit acknowledgement that the actions were a corporate action

The attempt by USGW to name any of us individuallly, without naming the entire Board and the Corporation is an improper legal or administrative action and inconsistent with Laverne's filing. The Board of this Florida Corporation acted, and I believe that any recourse is strictly in the Courts of the State of Florida as we have acted within our corporate authority within our Bylaws and the State of Florida Corporation laws.

Also, I received notice that my name/email address was entered into a Yahoo Group. I did not authorize it, and either you or I need to remove it.

I personally am troubled that Laverne does not appear to have asked us at the FLGWP Inc. To promptly effect a Grievance procedure, but rather chose to go to the USGWP. Unofficially speaking for the FLGWP Inc., I have drafted a Grievance procedure now before our BOD, and I personally hope to expedite its approval by our BOD. Once in place, we expect to advise Laverne that is in place, and her USGWP filed grievance is before the panel, and we invite any additional submissions. Within a rather brief period of time, since we as a BOD are familiar with the issues, there will be further discussions, and I assume that there will be a vote on the Grievance, i.e. to accept it and provide relief to Laverne, or to affirm the previous action.

This may be a way that all parties can feel that their separate formalities are observed.

Please let us know your/USGWP comments on this.

==============================

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 10/21/2009 1:48:27 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Re: Fw: Grievance 2009/08-15

I wonder why he was rejected. I certianly had no issue with him or the other 2, I don't know either of them and I did not know him/her. Which is as it should be. Personally I think it is a stalling tactic on FLGW's part. To my knowledge none of them know him/her either.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike & Diane

To: Laverne Tornow

Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:15 AM

Subject: Re: Fw: Grievance 2009/08-15

Dorman was rejected as mediator. We now have to wait until I can find another one.

Diane

-------Original Message-------

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 10/20/2009 11:21:21 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Fw: Grievance 2009/08-15

Kind of wondering about this rather cryptic message.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Dorman Holub

To: Laverne Tornow

Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 10:52 PM

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

I know you're wondering why we are waiting and not going forward with the grievance as planned.

You'll need to contact the Grievance Committee Chair for information and updates on the grievance.

Dorman Holub

On Oct 17, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Laverne Tornow wrote:

I have no problem with any of the Volunteers assigned to this case.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: txarchives@mac.com

To: laverne11@wildblue.net

Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 2:30 PM

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

My name is Dorman Holub. I am the appointed USGenWeb volunteer

Mediator for the mediation process concerning Grievance 2009/08-15.

Section 5D of the Grievance Committee bylaws

http://gc.usgenweb.org/procedures.html

Paragraph 5

"the mediator shall advise the parties of the identity of the members of the team by return receipted email once they are assigned. It shall be the responsibility of the parties to the dispute to raise the issue of bias or conflict by a member of the team.

"This shall be done privately to the mediator, or the committee member if the conflict is alleged against the mediator. All claims of bias or conflict must be raised prior to the beginning of the mediation Process."

My representation in the USGenWeb is as follows:

USGenWeb TX Archives Coordinator

TXGenWeb CC Shackelford, Throckmorton, Young

USGenWeb Texas Tombstone Project, Northeast Region

USGenWeb Grievance Committee Chair, Aug 2008-Jan 2009

Other members of the mediation team are:

Grievance Committee member - John Quigley

Volunteer Arbitrators:

Ellis Michaels and Pat Asher

If you desire to reject me as the mediator, please send an email to the Grievance Committee chair. Diane Siniard garebel@roadrunner.com

If you desire to reject any other member of the mediation team, please email me.

You will have 48 hours to make a decision on accepting or rejecting individual members of the team assigned to your grievance.

Dorman Holub

==============================

[Diane comments: Pay attention to dates of emails that I send to Laverne...]

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 10/31/2009 9:06:25 PM

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Joel Newport

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

I wanted to let you know that I am currently waiting for someone to volunteer as a mediator. We haven't forgotten you or the grievance, I just have to wait for someone to volunteer so we can try again to move into mediations.

Diane

CC: Joel Newport Grievance Committee Co-Chair

==============================

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 11/1/2009 12:09:20 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Thank you, I was wondering about it.

Laverne

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike & Diane

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Joel Newport

Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 8:06 PM

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

Diane

CC: Joel Newport Grievance Committee Co-Chair

==============================

[Diane comments: And now she complains that it has been quite some time since she heard from me...notice above she heard from me on Oct 31 and Nov 1...just 15 days previously...is that a long time?]

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 11/16/2009 6:25:48 PM

To: Mike & Diane

Cc: Joel Newport

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

It has been quite some time since anyone has communicated with me regarding my greivance so I thought I would drop a line to find out. What is going on? I would have assumed I would have been kept in the loop as to what is happening. The last communication I had from anyone was on October 31 when you told me you were awaiting volunteers. What was wrong with the original team that was presented?

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike & Diane

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Joel Newport

Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 6:37 PM

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

I need you to subscribe to this mailing list:

grievance-mediation-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

This will be for the mediation/arbitration of this grievance. The only people that will be subbed are you, the mediator, arbitrators, the GC Rep, and the people named in the grievance.

It is a private list and the info posted is not to be shared with anyone outside of this grievance.

Thanks!

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

==============================

[Diane comments: More breaking of the big C by Laverne....why didn’t she get in trouble?]

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 11/17/2009 11:46:04 AM

To: Joel Newport; Laverne Tornow

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri Bradley; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

First off, grievances may not be discussed with anyone who is not named in said grievance nor with anyone that is not on the Grievance Committee. I remind you of Section 5F- Grievance Process: All discussion regarding the issues during the grievance process is to be considered privileged and private, and shall not be disclosed during or after the process by either the team or either party, except as allowed by these procedures.

That being said, I will not discuss anything further on this grievance until we find a mediator. I have put out calls for mediators and we are awaiting someone to volunteer. I have also periodically sent you emails to let you know we are awaiting volunteers. I am sorry that we cannot make anyone volunteer, nor can we randomly select members from the project to serve as arbitrators or mediators. This is strictly volunteer service.

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

-------Original Message-------

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 11/17/2009 11:16:51 AM

To: Joel Newport

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri; Mike & Diane; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

The team I am referring to was the list of 3 arbitrators/mediators that was presented to me as the people who would be handling the greivance. Then I received a cryptic message that stated I would have to contact the GC in reference to my greivance, which I did. I was told they were rejected and I asked by whom and why and have received NO RESPONSE to that. The apparently rejected people were Dorman Holub, Pat Asher, Ellis Michaels and John Quigley. I never received an answer as to why or who rejected this team.

I was informed to subscribe to a yahoo group for this purpose, attempted to do so and could not. I was conveniently forgotten and have no idea what if any communication ocured on this list prior to my finally being subscribed to it. All I know is that I rejected no one, I had no reason to do so as I knew none of them and that is as it should be.Others were apparently privvy to my communication regarding this, but I was not privvy to any communication regarding this team or the rejection thereof of any members.

I have heard nothing at all since October about anything and have apparently been either unsubbed from the list/group or it has been deleted. As the Plaintiff (person bringing the greivance) I should be privvy to ALL communication regarding this greivance that the defendants are privvy to and that includes any objections to members of the team. Since that time only one token attempt at a call for volunteers has been made with no indication if any volunteers have come forward.

It is my personal opinion that there should be a pool of several volunteers, not just 3-4 people, so that situations like this do not occur. I also, from reading the Greivance procedure over and over again, believe that is also the intent of the procedure, to have a ready pool to choose from. It would be akin to a Jury Pool. Each month a percentage of the registered voters are randomly selected for jury duty. As trials are set up, members are empaneled 6 for regular court 12 for circuit court plus 2-4 alternates, each side gets to participate in a jury nullification process which is PUBLIC, by asking questions of the panel to ascertain if they have prior knowledge of the case before them. Even in a closed case(non public procedure such as child custody etc) BOTH sides are present during nullification and each side gets to CHALLENGE 1/2 of the jury in the presence of the body of the whole by asking questions of the individual members of the panel. Meaning that there are no secret communications from any of the participating parties and nullification of ONE member of the jury does not mean that ALL are dismissed only that one which was nullified and then one of the alternates fills the slot vacated. YOU DO NOT GET A CHANCE TO NULLIFY the alternates IF you are the one who challenged the the panel member, however the opposing side does have the opportunity to challenge a replacement. It is done this way so that as impartial a panel as possible is chosen.

As stated previously, I have not been kept informed of anything as regards this greivance other than persons were rejected.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Joel Newport

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Mike & Diane

Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:39 AM

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

The original team I am assuming you are referring to is the Grievance Committee. This group can only decide if a grievance is valid or not. They do not mediate or arbitrate the case, that is handled by another Volunteer. Unfortunately in an all volunteer organization, it takes Time for someone to step forward to handle a situation. We are Looking and you are not forgotten.

Joel Newport

GC Assistant Chair

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Laverne Tornow wrote:

> It has been quite some time since anyone has communicated

> with me regarding my greivance so I thought I would drop a

> line to find out. What is going on? I would have assumed I

> would have been kept in the loop as to what is happening.

> The last communication I had from anyone was on October 31

> when you told me you were awaiting volunteers. What was

> wrong with the original team that was presented?

> Laverne Tornow

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: Mike & Diane

> To: Laverne Tornow

> Cc: Joel Newport

> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 6:37 PM

> Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

> Laverne,

> I need you to subscribe to this mailing list:

> grievance-mediation-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

> This will be for the mediation/arbitration of this

> grievance. The only people that will be subbed are you, the

> mediator, arbitrators, the GC Rep, and the people named in

> the grievance.

> It is a private list and the info posted is not to be shared

> with anyone outside of this grievance.

> Thanks!

> Diane Siniard

> Grievance Committee Chair

Laverne,

This is the first that I have heard that you were unable to subscript to the yahoo group. Did you inform anyone or ask for help to do this? This is an important step and could be a reason that your grievance has not moved forward.

Who told you that the mediators were rejected? Do you have an email? I have no copy of a rejection in my records so I am curious as to where you heard this.

There is no list or group that you have been unsubbed from. The only communication regarding your grievance should take place on the yahoo group. If you never subscribed to that group, then you could not have unsubbed from the group.

As far having several people in a pool for grievances, that would be wonderful. But the reality is we don't have a pool of people to choose from. We put out the notice for volunteers on a monthly basis and use the people who are qualified that respond.

So the first step is to get you on the yahoo list so that you can post there and not discuss this with people who are not apart of your mediation which include the people you have cc'd on your email.

Diane should be able to help you subscribe to the list. If your invitation has expired, then a new one should be issued to you.

Joel

> Laverne,

> You are subscribed to the yahoo group that was set up for

> the hearing of this grievance. There have been no messages

> on the list - I'll send a test message in a moment so that

> you can verify that you're subscribed.

> Sherri

==============================

[Diane comments: Can you say RUDE?]

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 11/17/2009 1:01:28 PM

To: Mike & Diane; Joel Newport

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri Bradley; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

I hardly think anything I have said constitutes a private communication. I merely ASKED questions about why nothing is being DONE regarding my greivance. SINCE my greivance process apparently has NOT YET BEGUN your privacy issue is moot, however my CONCERNS regarding this issue ARE pertinent. The lack of communication is abhorent and contrary to any possible chance of a fair hearing.

As for your "periodically sent you emails to let you know we are awaiting volunteers" you have sent ONE, weeks ago and only after I asked what was going on. I have not been kept informed of anything unless I practically demand a response to a direct question. One message does not qualify as a periodic mailing and it is not periodic if I have to ask for an update.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike & Diane

To: Joel Newport; Laverne Tornow

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri Bradley; contact@kempchronicles.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 11:46 AM

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Diane Siniard

Grievance Committee Chair

-------Original Message-------

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 11/17/2009 11:16:51 AM

To: Joel Newport

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri; Mike & Diane; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

As stated previously, I have not been kept informed of anything as regards this greivance other than persons were rejected.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Joel Newport

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Mike & Diane

Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:39 AM

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

Joel Newport

GC Assistant Chair

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Laverne Tornow wrote:

> It has been quite some time since anyone has communicated

> with me regarding my greivance so I thought I would drop a

> line to find out. What is going on? I would have assumed I

> would have been kept in the loop as to what is

> happening. The last communication I had from anyone was on

> October 31 when you told me you were awaiting volunteers.

> What was wrong with the original team that was presented?

> Laverne Tornow

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: Mike & Diane

> To: Laverne Tornow

> Cc: Joel Newport

> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 6:37 PM

> Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

> Laverne,

> I need you to subscribe to this mailing list:

> grievance-mediation-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

> This will be for the mediation/arbitration of this

> grievance. The only people that will be subbed are you, the

> mediator, arbitrators, the GC Rep, and the people named in

> the grievance. It is a private list and the info posted is

> not to be shared with anyone outside of this grievance.

> Thanks!

> Diane Siniard

> Grievance Committee Chair

==============================

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 11/17/2009 1:15:18 PM

To: Joel Newport; Laverne Tornow

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri Bradley; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Again I remind you of Section 5F- Grievance Process: All discussion regarding the issues during the grievance process is to be considered privileged and private, and shall not be disclosed during or after the process by either the team or either party, except as allowed by these procedures.

Note that it states DURING the process. Since your grievance has been accepted we are in the midst of the process. Again you are reminded that Sherri, Tina and Jeff are not involved with this grievance and should not be involved with any correspondence.

I also ask you to take note that the last email you received from me was on October 31, 2009, 17 days ago. That is hardly a long period of time without any communication of letting you know what is going on. Prior to that it was October 21, October 17, October 16, etc. I have copies of the emails as well as your replies to them as well as some read receipts.

I am scheduling some surgery today so Joel might be the one to contact you more frequently than I in the next few weeks depending on the date set for my surgery. If you need copies of the emails I have sent to you as well as your replies of them I can forward them to you, just let me know. I will be leaving home around 2:30 PM EST to go to the doctor and probably will be gone for a couple of hours at least. I will send them to you if needed as soon as I hear from you or as soon as I possibly can.

Diane

-------Original Message-------

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 11/17/2009 1:01:28 PM

To: Mike & Diane; Joel Newport

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri Bradley; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne Tornow

==============================

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 11/17/2009 1:39:55 PM

To: Mike & Diane; Joel Newport

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri Bradley; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Again I reiterate that since nothing has been done or discussed and any response or message from you has been preciptitated by an e-mail from me, no act of revealing confidential information has been breached. I have posted nothing that has appeared on ANY CONFIDENTIAL LIST and furthermore your e-mails to me have ALWAYS been precipitated by a direct question from me. No e-mail from you or any other member of the GC has been received without my first requesting information. Acceptance is one thing, since no action has been taken, no testimony or questions asked or given the procedure has NOT begun.

The salient statement is the first Sentence

When the team is seated, the parties shall be so advised by the Mediator. The parties shall have seventy-two (72) hours to submit to the Mediator a written statement of their position on the issues of the dispute. The mediator shall provide the position statements to the team members for their review.

No team has been seated therefore the process has not begun!

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike & Diane

To: Joel Newport ; Laverne Tornow

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; Sherri Bradley; contact@kempchronicles.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:15 PM

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Diane

==============================

From: Sherri

Date: 11/17/2009 2:25:44 PM

To: Laverne Tornow; Mike & Diane; Joel Newport

Cc: Tina S. Vickery; contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: RE: Grievance 2009/08-15

Laverne,

I think all of us recognize your frustration with the process. You’re not being ignored, nor is your grievance being ignored. Your grievance has been accepted. I’m speaking without any direct knowledge of the issues, but if the mediators weren’t rejected by you, my guess would be that the ones you filed the grievance against rejected them. Additional mediators are being sought. Please allow the grievance committee some time to complete this task. Does 30 days to get this accomplished seem reasonable to you, if an update is sent to you in a couple of weeks? Obviously, if mediators are found before then, you’ll be notified of such. In the meantime, please refrain from discussing this with anyone so that there aren’t confidentiality issues added to the rest of the issues to be dealt with. Failure to abide by the GC procedures could affect the outcome – and I know that you don’t want that to happen.

It’s unfortunate that there is not a pool of mediators and arbitrators – but we can’t force anyone to volunteer for either of these jobs, nor can we arbitrarily volunteer someone like the army does (i.e. we need volunteers - you and you and you volunteer <g>). Sometimes I think it would make everyone’s job easier.

Once again, please give the GC the 30 days to find additional mediators, and you’ll get an update in two weeks, if I have to hound Diane to make sure she or Joel send it.

Thanks,

Sherri Bradley

National Coordinator

USGenWeb Project

> Thank you.

> Laverne Tornow

[Diane comments: Thank you? That is all she has to say after raising all that hell!!!]

==============================

[Diane comments: While I was down recovering from knee surgery Sherri takes over...]

From: Sherri

Date: 12/9/2009 9:54:20 PM

To: lyzehner@knology.net; mikeflood301@yahoo.com; pmcswain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; Franmuse@aol.com; dgries@comcast.net

Cc: Mike & Diane

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

As you’ve been notified by Diane Siniard, the Grievance Committee Chairperson, a grievance was filed against you all by a former CC of the FLGenWeb Project. The AB was contacted by Diane Siniard because there has been less than acceptable cooperation by the group of you in trying to move this grievance forward into mediation.

I will remind you all that per the USGenWeb Project Bylaws, Article XIV, Grievance Procedures and Appeals Process, that the Grievance Committee is tasked with administering a fair, orderly and timely resolution of a grievance. Article XIV, Section 6 (2) states that when a member is dismissed from a position in a State, Local or Special Project, that the position may not be filled until the expiration of the time for that member to file a grievance and that when the said member files a grievance, that position may not be filled unless the grievance resolution calls for the member to lose the position.

The Standard Rules, Section V, Grievance Procedures also states the following: “When a conflict arises between two members of the USGenWeb Project that cannot be resolved informally, either party has the option of requesting a review of the dispute by the Grievance Committee. It further goes on to state that the final decision of the Grievance Committee is binding on all parties.

I realize that FLGenWeb is incorportated, but your Project, therefore all of you, are members of the USGenWeb Project. This is proven by the fact that the FLGenWeb Project displays the logo of the USGenWeb Project, as well as participating in the annual elections that are held.

Grievance 2009/08-15 was filed within the 14 day time limit stated in the Grievance Committee Procedures, so the fact that you’ve all been named in the grievance cannot be ignored or allowed to continue to languish due to the fact that Mr. Gries has made some rather sweeping statements that he is speaking for you all as a group, but there’s been no proof of this authorization for him to speak for the rest of you. Ms. Siniard has requested the information and responses from the group, but has met with no success in receiving a response.

When you all were notified that a grievance had been filed, you were also notified that the grievance process is covered by confidentiality rules as stated in Section 5F states: “All discussion regarding the issues during the grievance process is to be considered privileged and private, and shall not be disclosed during or after the process by either the team or either party, except as allowed by these procedures.” The AB has received several reports that the confidentiality of the process, as required by the bylaws and Grievance Procedures, has been breached. This is a serious problem and cannot continue to occur.

Dennis Gries has indicated in at least a couple of messages that he speaks for the group, yet in others, he says he is speaking only for himself. He has stated that he rejects the first mediator assigned, Dorman Holub, and will continue to reject ANY mediator that is presented.

I need to hear from EACH of you, SEPARATELY, if there is a spokesman for the group, and if so, whom it is. You should all realize and know that the Advisory Board takes the responsibility of ensuring that there is an operating the Grievance Process very seriously. It is not something that can be ignored, or only responded to if it appears that one side or the other is the one that will prevail. If you fail to act in good faith in regards to complying with the member-approved Grievance Procedures, the Advisory Board is ready to consider disciplinary action against those named in this grievance that fail to participate in the process.

Sherri Bradley

National Coordinator

USGenWeb Project

==============================

From: franmuse@aol.com

Date: 12/10/2009 10:26:36 PM

To: usgenwebnc@windstream.net; lyzehner@knology.net; mikeflood301@yahoo.com; pmcswain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; dgries@comcast.net; franmuse@aol.com

Cc: garebel@roadrunner.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Dear Sherri,

As President/SC of FLGenWeb Project, Inc. and also as a co-named person, I am writing to you on behalf of the entire Board of Directors of the FLGenWeb Project, Inc., in my official capacity. This is our official corporate communication and should be deemed to be a consensus response.

Dennis sent a list of things we wished clarified. None has been answered so far. I have been very happy for him to respond to the grievance requests. Anyone with objections would have sent a message stating that to Diane.

We are very willing to answer for our actions as a Board. That is the way the Fl Statutes say it is to be done. However, we are not willing to engage in defending any action against the individuals named in this claim that was not committed by, and could not have been committed by, any one of us, or any combination of us, because there is no mechanism by which the claimed action could have been committed by those individuals. The grievant was dismissed by the BOARD under due process, strictly following our bylaws and the applicable Florida statutes. There is no mechanism for some collection of individuals to dismiss a member. We are not a street gang; we are a deliberative body. It is not possible for the named individuals to defend themselves against such a claim, because none of the named defendants dismissed the grievant. She was, in fact, dismissed by a majority vote of the Board after extended debate and deliberation in her presence.

Therefore, this action is null and void because it does not name the appropriate party.

Laverne has put both the FLGenWeb Project, Inc. and us individually in her grievance making it hard to leave the other members of the board out of the process. I am sure you can see our dilemma.

Reading in the mediation section it seems these questions are to be decided before we start mediation.

Sec 5 F-All discussion regarding the issues during the grievance process is to be considered privileged and private, and shall not be disclosed during or after the process by either the team or either party, except as allowed by these procedures.

From Section 6-The mediation process is confidential, and parties involved must agree to uphold that confidentiality unless ALL parties agree to the contrary.

This statement is not going to work with our process. The outcome of the deliberations will have a direct bearing on every single member of FLGWP. If you side either way, the membership has a right to know what affects them individually. This procedure is not a personnel problem. It is an attempt to dispute our bylaws which were crafted by Laverne and 2 others. This process has been in front of our whole membership from the beginning. The motion was brought on the Board list where the membership may read-only and Laverne posted to the Membership list so they were all aware of what the Board was doing. The decisions of the Board action have been clearly shown to our membership. How can you now state our members are not to know what you have done to our project?

Sec. 5F - When the team is seated, the parties shall be so advised by the Mediator. We have seen one person unsub from the list. Who was that person? That is all we have seen. We have been waiting for some indication that the Grievance process is ready to go forward.

Dennis provided Diane with the applicable Florida Statute and also our bylaws. There has been no response from Diane indicating any decision. All we have had was notice that we were subbed to a list. No other instructions have been forthcoming. We thought Diane would respond to Dennis' questions. He suggested she check with legal counsel to see if the USGW position was correct and said he was awaiting a reply. These were preliminary to our joining the mediation process. USGW guidelines says one of us is to respond to the mediation not all- is that correct?

The questions and answers are to be before the mediation process begins. Once his questions have been addressed and proceedure corrected, we are more than happy to go forward as stated above. Is not Laverne to also be subbed to this process? Her name has not appeared on any email so far which suggests she has not signed in.

This is not a statement of any answer to the charges. I am merely trying to find out what is to happen next. I have never been involved in anything like this and want to do it correctly.

Fran Smith

President/SC FLGenWeb Project, Inc.

-----Original Message-----

From: Sherri <usgenwebnc@windstream.net>

To: lyzehner@knology.net; mikeflood301@yahoo.com; pmcswain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; Franmuse@aol.com; dgries@comcast.net

Cc: Mike & Diane

Sent: Wed, Dec 9, 2009 9:53 pm

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

Sherri Bradley

National Coordinator

USGenWeb Project

==============================

From: Sherri

Date: 12/18/2009 5:31:54 AM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: FW: Grievance Update

OK, could you please ask Laverne why she didn’t name all of the FLGenWeb board members as a group instead of just some of them? It’s one of the supposed “reasons” that they won’t respond to accept a mediator and that some aren’t responding when asked to explain why they won’t reply to any emails about the grievance. Without this info, I’m not sure we will get anywhere, and if the AB is asked to intervene I’m sure the answer will be required as an explanation.

Thanks,

Sherri

From: Laverne Tornow

Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 2:50 AM

To: Sherri

Subject: Re: Grievance Update

Sherri,

As the Greivance Chair has not asked for any information as to why some people were charged and others not, it would be presumptious of me to to send information that has not been requested. It would leave an implication of having discussed the greivance with people which is verbotten, from my understanding. If asked I will certianly answer any questions, but it is also my understanding that any questions would come from the mediation/arbitration team and to my knowledge there is not yet such a team.

Basically my hands are tied as I have not been contacted by any GC member regarding my greivance for several weeks. I have no clue what has gone on, what is currently going on as no one communictes with me on ANYTHING.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Sherri

To: Laverne Tornow

Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 7:34 PM

Subject: RE: Grievance Update

OK, you're actually right. Would you please provide the information to Diane, then?

Thanks,

Sherri

-----Original Message-----

From: Laverne Tornow

Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 2:22 PM

To: Sherri

Subject: Re: Grievance Update

Grievance Update Sherri,

First let me just say I am very sorry to hear you have been ill. I know how those respiratory bugs can seem to hang on forever and a day and if you don't allow proper resting time after you think it is gone, it will relapse on you and each successive bout will be longer to recover from as your immune system is down. (personal experience speaking here as a victim of a similar situation and as a healthcare provider).

I appreciate your contacting me, but I am confused. Diane stated that nothing regarding the greivance was to be discussed with anyone other than the GC, I was expecting to hear from the GC in reference to the grievance.

I will be glad to respond to your questions as long as I can have full assurance that doing so is not a violation of the greivance procedure. For reference I have included a pertinent snippet from Diane's last correspondence with me in November when I cc'd you, Jeff and Tina on my inquiry as to its status. The full email including headers is below my signature.

(snip)

(/snip)

Laverne Tornow

==============================

From: Mike & Diane

To: Joel Newport, Laverne Tornow

Cc: Tina S. Vickery, Sherri Bradley, contact@kempchronicles.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Diane

----- Original Message -----

From: Sherri

To: Laverne Tornow

Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 10:47 AM

Subject: Grievance Update

Hi Laverne,

I just wanted to give you a quick update on the status of the grievance and offer an apology. I've been down with some sort of respiratory bug for the last 3 months. Just when I think I might have it licked, it comes back. My stamina to get things done has just disappeared and getting the letters sent out to the FL bunch was one of the things I didn't get done when I'd planned to.

I've heard back from a couple of the FLGenWeb members named in the grievance. I do have one question, though. Is there a reason that you named only some of the FLGenWeb board by name in the grievance and didn't name some of them? I'm getting comments about that and don't have a clue what they're referring to. If you could enlighten me, I'd sure appreciate it. That would also make it easier for me to respond to the replies that I'm getting.

Thanks,

Sherri

[Diane comments: See how I got cut right out of the conversations? Totally breaking the rules! Sherri had no business sticking her nose into a grievance!]

==============================

[Diane comments: At this point I had to accept it. Sherri had taken over the grievance]

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 12/18/2009 10:38:39 AM

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Sherri Bradley; Joel Newport

Subject: Grievance Update

Laverne,

I am not sure if you are aware, but I have been out due to a recent surgery and a very slow and painful recovery. Prior to that I wasn't online as much due to the pain prior to the surgery. My apologies for everything taking a super long time to get accomplished, this was certainly not my intentions and along with other delays from other parties I have spoken with Sherri. Sherri has stepped in to help speed up the process of your grievance since it has met with so many delays due to unforeseen problems and challenges, so please feel free to explain to her why some of the FLGenWeb board members were named and others were not. I also had some comments about this but I thought it was possibly due to an election that was held after you were removed but please correct me if I am wrong, and let us know.

You will not be in violation of the GC Procedures by discussing it with Sherri as long as you don't include anyone else in the replies with the exception of myself, Joel or someone else from the GC.

Thanks in advance,

Diane

==============================

From: Laverne Tornow

Date: 12/18/2009 11:53:43 AM

To: Mike & Diane

Cc: Sherri Bradley; Joel Newport

Subject: Re: Grievance Update

Those who were not named, supported me and attempted to get the others to abide by the rules. That's why some were not included in the charges.

Laverne Tornow

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike & Diane

To: Laverne Tornow

Cc: Sherri Bradley ; Joel Newport

Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 10:38 AM

Subject: Grievance Update

Laverne,

Sherri has stepped in to help speed up the process of your grievance since it has met with so many delays due to unforeseen problems and challenges, so please feel free to explain to her why some of the FLGenWeb board members were named and others were not. I also had some comments about this but I thought it was possibly due to an election that was held after you were removed but please correct me if I am wrong, and let us know.

You will not be in violation of the GC Procedures by discussing it with Sherri as long as you don't include anyone else in the replies with the exception of myself, Joel or someone else from the GC.

Thanks in advance,

Diane

==============================

From: Sherri

Date: 12/29/2009 9:52:32 AM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Laverne's Grievance

Diane,

The FLGenWeb board is refusing to recognize Laverne’s grievance, even with my input, because she names individuals in stead of the entire board. What do you think about having her to revise the grievance to state that it’s against the FLGenWeb board, specifically xx, xx, xx (list names)? She didn’t file against the entire board to start with because some of the board members supported her. I really don’t know what else to do.

If we do this and they still refuse to participate it’s time to get the entire AB involved.

Hoep you had a good holiday and are feeling better.

Sherri

==============================

From: Mike & Diane

Date: 12/29/2009 10:49:39 AM

To: Sherri

Subject: Re: Laverne's Grievance

Sherri,

If an amendment were to be done it would have needed to be done before the 10 days expiration after filing. So, if we ask her to do an amendment they can call that the amendment was done way after the 10 day grace period for filing the amendment and call for a disqualification of this grievance and ask for it to be dismissed for this reason. This is Dennis pulling anything he can to get this grievance thrown out. Laverne has every right to name whomever she wants in this grievance, the FLGenWeb board cannot dictate to her or to us who she can or cannot name in her grievance which is what they are trying to do this is against our procedures which is a violation of these procedures. I think we should let the grievance stand as is and insist that they either participate in the grievance process or the AB will step in and take it from there. I believe that is the only options we have at this point.

Christmas was good, I hope yours was as well. I go back to the Dr today for my knee. Going to either light a fire or ask to go see someone else. The hammer pounding my knee with every step and constant pain is getting really old.

Diane

-------Original Message-------

From: Sherri

Date: 12/29/2009 9:52:32 AM

To: Mike & Diane

Subject: Laverne's Grievance

Diane,

If we do this and they still refuse to participate it’s time to get the entire AB involved.

Hoep you had a good holiday and are feeling better.

Sherri

[Diane comments: Her reply:]

> OK, that works for me. I hadn't thought of that.

> I'll write them all once again either later tonight or

> tomorrow morning and lay it out for them. Then we'll do

> what we need to to force the issue with the AB.

> Sherri

==============================

From: Sherri

Date: 1/4/2010 9:06:56 PM

To: franmuse@aol.com; lyzehner@knology.net; mikeflood301@yahoo.com; pmcswain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; dgries@comcast.net

Cc: garebel@roadrunner.com

Subject: RE: Grievance 2009/08-15

Fran,

There are several problems with your response to my previous email.

It is the choice of the grievant as to who is named in a grievance. Laverne chose not to include the entire board in the grievance she filed, and that is entirely her right. There is no requirement that a grievance must be filed against an entire group of people, as you and Dennis are trying to claim.

You don’t have the choice of whether you are bound by the confidentiality of the grievance process. The bylaws and Grevience Procedures clearly state that the process is confidential and can’t be discussed outside of the involved parties, the mediators and others directly involved in the process. Your claim that you have the right to discuss this with all of the FLGenWeb CCs or with the rest of the board of FLGenWeb is not valid.

You were all subbed to the mail list that was set up for the grievance mediation. All involved parties, on both sides, the assigned mediator and the GC representative were subbed. The mediation was ready to move forward as far as the Grievance Committee was concerned, until Dennis notified Diane that he, speaking for all of the rest of you, would not accept the identified mediator. He went on to state that ANY mediator assigned would be deemed unacceptable. I don’t understand your statement that you were waiting for the mediation to move forward since the only reason that it hadn’t begun was because of Dennis’ actions.

The USGenWeb Project’s Grievance process was approved by the entire membership. It is not your right to refuse to participate in the grievance process by stating that “it won’t work” for you. All USGenWeb Project members are covered by and required to follow the process. You must follow and abide by the procedures as USGenWeb Project members.

The ball’s now in your court. If you’re ready to proceed with the grievance, as filed, by accepting a mediator and participating in the member-approved grievance procedures, we’ll move forward with the mediation step of the grievance. Should you all continue to refuse to accept an assigned mediator and/or to participate in and abide by the USGenWeb Project’s grievance procedures, the next step will be that the Advisory Board is asked to step in and disciplinary action be taken against each of you individually for this refusal.

You have until 9:00 p.m. on 7 January 2010 to decide what you want to do and let me know.

Sherri Bradley

Natonal Coordinator

USGenWeb Project

From: franmuse@aol.com [mailto:franmuse@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 10:26 PM

To: usgenwebnc@windstream.net; lyzehner@knology.net; mikeflood301@yahoo.com; pmcswain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; dgries@comcast.net; franmuse@aol.com

Cc: garebel@roadrunner.com

Subject: Re: Grievance 2009/08-15

Dear Sherri,

Therefore, this action is null and void because it does not name the appropriate party.

Laverne has put both the FLGenWeb Project, Inc. and us individually in her grievance making it hard to leave the other members of the board out of the process. I am sure you can see our dilemma.

Reading in the mediation section it seems these questions are to be decided before we start mediation.

From Section 6-The mediation process is confidential, and parties involved must agree to uphold that confidentiality unless ALL parties agree to the contrary.

This is not a statement of any answer to the charges. I am merely trying to find out what is to happen next. I have never been involved in anything like this and want to do it correctly.

Fran Smith

President/SC FLGenWeb Project, Inc.

-----Original Message-----

From: Sherri <usgenwebnc@windstream.net>

To: lyzehner@knology.net; mikeflood301@yahoo.com; pmcswain@tampabay.rr.com; wildamurphy@gmail.com; Franmuse@aol.com; dgries@comcast.net

Cc: Mike & Diane <garebel@roadrunner.com>

Sent: Wed, Dec 9, 2009 9:53 pm

Subject: Grievance 2009/08-15

Sherri Bradley

National Coordinator

USGenWeb Project

==============================