Karen Mitchell Backs Down Entire Advisory Board
Karen Mitchell stated in written notice to the AB that she would not abide by their ruling if it meant restoring Barnum to his rightful position as County Coordinator. In the hearing it was revealed that Barnum's rights were violated, he was wrongfully fired from NMGenWeb which he help establish. The AB knew this when they refused to apply Parliamentary Rules of Sturgis. Failure was an easy way out for them. They did not have a showdown with Karen Mitchell. They made no ruling. They just walked away as the AB has walked away from helping CCs and LCs since 1998. They were and remain cowards.
A ruling from The Advisory Board of USGenWeb. Permission was granted by a Board member for publication.
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Burow [mailto:sburow@swbell.net]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 10:35 PM
To: jcnreno@charter.net; km1109@ghvalley.net; detict@cox.net
Subject: Ruling of the USGenWeb Advisory Board - Barnum v. Mitchell
In the matter of the grievance filed by Charles Barnum against Karen Mitchell as State Coordinator of the NMGenWeb Project the USGenWeb Advisory Board has reviewed the information provided by both parties and makes the following findings:
1] that over a period of time previous to delinking, Charles Barnum's communications within the NMGenWeb Project were of an adversarial nature; (I agree in part, but did the Board Members read the 70 adversarial statements by a minority of NMGenWeb CCs? Did they see the Open Season remarks by the State Coordinator? Am I supposed to sit back and take it? Adversarial communicating within and between members has been a part of this organization from the beginning. The AB should kick everyone out based on that.)
2] that instead of giving warning to Charles Barnum and providing a period of time to stop his unacceptable actions, and not restart them, Karen Mitchell delinked Charles Barnum's county website without providing reasons;
3] that Charles Barnum filed a grievance under the USGenWeb Bylaws as a former member indicating he was improperly delinked and that since NMGenWeb and USGenWeb lacked bylaws addressing delinking, he was using Sturgis as his authority seeking resolution;
4] that the Advisory Board finds that both parties contributed negatively to the issue and further finds no legal foundation for ruling in favor of either party; and (See legal opinion below.)
5] that the Advisory Board encourages the NMGenWeb State Coordinator to reconsider the drastic action providing both parties can arrive at a compromise position and can mitigate their mutual hostility whereby the purposes of the NMGenWeb project would be better served.
Further, as a result of this and similar issues brought before this Advisory Board, it is recommended as strongly as possible that each XXGenWeb develop or amend XXGenWeb Bylaws which cover, at a minimum, the rules and processes for removing/delinking members and for mailing list behavior. (Insert: That's what I have been advocating in NMGenWeb since 1998! However, what mailing list behavior are you referring to? I saw only private emails and legitimate mailing list posts in Mitchell's pages of lies. Why did you not ask me about each and every list post and email? Answer: Because you did not want to know the truth about Mitchell's lies and filth. Further, if you found no way to rule for either side, then the parties should have been restored to their original status. Ruling that both sides were at fault and taking no action allows the illegal expulsion to stand and rewards Mitchell for her misbehavior. Too bad for USGenWeb that CCs are not equally regarded as SCs. CCs to this day have no rights.)
Agreed and Signed:
Linda Blum-Barton
Karen De Groote-Johnson
Bettie Wood
Freddie Spradlin
Greta Thompson
Cyndie Enfinger
Suzanne Shephard
Larry Flesher
Mike Peterson
Sundee Maynez
Jan Cortez
Alice Allen
George Waller
Member Recused:
Phyllis Rippee
Submitted to the parties this 24th day of April, 2007
Scott Burow
National Coordinator
USGenWeb Project
(End)
(Board Members. You did what you thought best for USGenWeb. But it was not justice under the rules.
You had the power to make a just ruling. Your conscious follows you. Blessings and forgiveness.)
From my advisor, (abridged):
I don't agree with "Ruling of the USGenWeb Advisory Board - Barnum v. Mitchell" item #4 "that the Advisory Board finds no legal foundation for ruling in favor of either party."
The AB is required to follow Sturgis, which is "Parliamentary Law" (pg. 1), and your legal "Rights of Members" were violated by Karen on several items of said Rights. The AB adopted Sturgis, and the courts hold that the AB must follow parliamentary law." (Sturgis, pg. 4). Contrary to item #4, Sturgis is the legal foundation for ruling.
Furthermore, If any of the parliamentary rights of a member are violated, legal action may be taken against the organization. (Sturgis, pg. 222). And, you have fulfilled the courts requirement that they usually won't adjudicate such actions until you have exhausted USGenWeb (AB) means of enforcing the rights of members, you followed the USGenWeb rules and filed a grievance, Karen filed no grievance but instead broke the rules.
The USGenWeb did not follow their own rules. Sturgis gives members the right for legal action if the AB refuses to follow their own rules. (end of opinion)
I had no opportunity to question any witness in this matter, nor did the Advisory Board bother to ask me even one question concerning my private emails, list postings or any other question.