Concern for the historical society
To the Editor:
The continuing interest in the board's actions and ongoing concern for the future of the Danville Historical Society is encouraging.
After several meetings, the "special bylaw committee" recommended the board return to the well researched, much discussed and voter approved 2006 bylaws, ignored by the current administration. These 2006 bylaws were simple and concise, maintaining a traditional democratic organization, transparent, positive and inclusive. Very minor modifications were suggested.
Two board meetings were called to discuss the bylaw committee's recommendations, and a third when the agenda was abandoned at the second. It might appear that the board is heeding voter mandates and committee recommendations. The board has, as a result of mandate, 1) jettisoned the idea of voter disenfranchisement, but has responded by completely removing agenda items requiring annual voter approval for yet another year. The board has also agreed to: 2) conduct "open" board meetings, but plans them for weekday work hours, limiting member attendance, 3) publicly announce board meetings in advance, but failed to do so for the last three meetings, 4) follow Robert's Rules of Order, but has cherry picked limited pages, 5) return to the society's former "transparency," but outlawed taping meetings, 6) return to the previous, democratic organizational structure, but is considering increasing the powers and privileges of the society's employee, after her repeated urging, and has instituted a mandatory "ethics code" for board members cherry picking inclusions from a published model, but refusing to include whistleblower "rights," advocated by the same source. The second section of the new "ethics code" establishes an accusatory judicial and punitive system historically reminiscent of Berlin in the mid 1900s and Salem three centuries earlier. Get a copy and see how historical precedent is being mimicked.