Identity crisis

I think I’ve mentioned this before, but the newest community group in town — Alameda Citizens Task Force (ACTF) — has been putting themselves out there, big time, by hosting forums about the budget and getting their name in the paper, etc and so forth.    They recently have put up a website with some general information about the group and an all important Mission Statement.   It’s interesting because in media coverage they are styled as a “non-partisan” group, but on their website their vision statement is:

We are a permanent watchdog group advocating for effective government and we take actions as necessary to support ACT’s mission.

The mission, if anyone is interested, is that they:

…protect the quality of life for Alamedans by:

• Promoting open government
• Advocating fiscal responsibility
• Analyzing critical comments on city issues
• Encouraging community involvement in city government

Which is an admirable mission, although the third bullet was a bit confusing.   I think what they meant to write was “Critically analyzing and commenting on city issues”, but right now it doesn’t read like that.

And not to be left out they have “Core Values” which are listed as:

• Vigilance
• Truth
• Civility

If you would like to become an “Active Member” you have to pony up $15 per person ($30 for a family) to be involved, otherwise you can just be a regular member which limits you to receiving email updates only.

Here’s the irony of the informational page about the group, while one of their key missions is to promote open government, they have opted to not reveal the names of the leaders of the organization.   Perhaps the omission was unintentional.

Also what the membership and mission statement page fails to reveal is the structure of the organization as a whole.   For example, who determines which issues are tackled and what is the role of  ”Active Members” as opposed to the “Steering Committee” factor in to what issues that ACTF decides to comment on publicly.

For example, during the City Manager Search, there were theories floating around that the appointment of John Russo was fait accompli and that there weren’t really as many candidates as the City had said that there were.   Apparently that wasn’t limited to just random blog comments because a member of ACTF also contacted the City Clerk’s office to attempt to get that information:

Another example is the recent closed session agenda item which the Council discussed Councilmember Lena Tam’s government claim for a reimbursement of her legal fees expended during Interim City Manager Ann Marie Gallant’s investigation, which by the way, the report out on that was:

Council was briefed on the claim. Direction was provided to staff.

ACTF sent a letter to the City Council prior to this meeting asking that the City not reimburse Councilmember Lena Tam for her legal fees, saying that Ann Marie Gallant acting appropriately.   It is unclear if making a statement such as that required a vote of all active members or if the steering committee alone is allowed to make judgment calls on issues such as this.  Because once you get into this territory it’s no longer “non-partisan” in the sense that “non-partisan” is free from bias.

Most community groups, like the Alameda Democratic Club or the Chamber of Commerce require a majority vote of their membership before endorsing a position or coming out against a position.   And while I get the feeling that ACTF is simply another Action Alameda (yes folks at one point Action Alameda wasn’t just a “news” site, it started out as a watchdog group as well), or Save our City! Alameda or Coalition for a Better Alameda, the mission statement is something that people on any point in the political spectrum can get behind, so if say someone like me (not that I’m going to and I’m not quite sure I would be welcome ) were to want to become a member, I know that I personally wouldn’t be in favor of sending either of those letters.

Anyway, I think that if ACTF really wants to be taken seriously, they will need to be more open — as they are expecting our government to be — about their internal structure and their leadership.   And they should probably ask “Glinda of Oz” who created the “official” ACTF website that she might want to take down her Blogger sites in light of what looks like the actual official ACTF site actually now existing.

Because while she has that site also up, she also has her own personal blog: Entre Les Etoiles which is the first hit when one searches for Alameda Citizens Task Force on Google:

While Glinda of Oz does talk about her role in ACTF as a “founding member” on Entre Les Etoiles:

She violates one of the “Core Values” of “civility” in her latest post:

Oh, and by the way, the word “Immediate” is misspelled on the front page of the ACTF website, just FYI, it’s probably hard to change since it’s a graphic and not text.

Advertisement