Minutes of the EDIDA Board Meeting
12/8/05 (November)

Board Attendees: Hale, Jonah (on telephone for first part of meeting), Winston, Leslie, John, Stephanie, Mark, Aydan, Charles (acknowledged during the meeting for having been improperly removed from Board due to a misreading of the bylaws regarding election of Board members)

Working Staff Attendees: Gina and Rose, EDIDA Executive Directors, Karla (Voicer for Hale), Don (Voicer for Winston and Minute taker)

Public Attendees: Adrienne Lauby, Sean Eusantos, Brad Cleveland, Dan McMullan, Nicolas Feldman, Glen Vinton, Jonathan Gold, Michael Delacoeur, Ron Washington, Jane Aeon, Scott Luebking, Jesse Townley, Kyle Eminger, Blane Beckwith, Inger Maxwell, Peggy Hecker, Steven Van Manen, Michael Carter, Louie Lock, Belinda Stradley

The meeting came to order at 6:40 P.M

Stephanie made introductions and announced that Public Comment would be two minutes each. Scott asked to extend the individual time for Public Comment to because of the restructuring issue. Public Comment was extended to three minutes each.

Glen asked for a summarization of the problems leading to EDI's restructuring. Mark replied that it was for managerial reasons.

Scott said that he wanted to see changes on EDI's Board. He felt that Gina and Rose did not have sufficient opportunity to address their shortcomings.

Blane said that no one knows what is going on and the EDI Board has not been responsive to community needs. He wanted reform of the bylaws, an elected Board, and community involvement.

Jesse said that the community only sees one side of what is going on, of necessity, and said that improvements could be made to both the Board and EDI's structure.

Dan introduced himself as an ex- EDI Board member. He said he felt badly treated by the EDI Board. He wanted to know why he was removed from the Board. He felt that EDI was personality driven.

Inger asked who would train the proposed new EDI Executive Director. She said she does not understand the idea of Gina and Rose training the new Executive Director. She said that Gina and Rose were doing a good job.

Scott said that he wanted to change the nature of the Board meeting for the community members present to have a dialogue with the Board. Rose concurred. Scott, Nicolas, and Rose advocated for this change in the Board Agenda for the evening.

Kyle said that he had been an attendant for EDI for a long time, and also had been a Board member. He said that he was basically happy with the management. He said that he felt that EDI having a single Executive Director was too demanding. He said that it was stressful to have this turnover of ED's, and that it seemed vague why the restructure was needed.

Michael Carter said that Gina and Rose were doing a good job and that he wanted to give them a chance to correct their problems.

Jane introduced herself as a personal friend to Gina and Rose. She said that she was on another Board and thinks that things should be left alone. She said that things were running OK and that the staff was satisfied.

Brad said that he had extensive experience in the community. He was very upset at Gina and Rose's demotion. He wants people to get along.

Charles introduced himself as an ex-EDI Board member. He participated in an eight month review of the Executive Directors. He supports Gina and Rose and feels the restructuring is unconscionable. He said that he also felt he was still on the Board. He read the pertinent section of the EDI Bylaws and said that 11 members should have been elected instead of 10. Jonathan Gold agreed with Charles' claim and also said that community elections were advisable.

Michael Delacoeur said that he felt the EDI Board should want continuity and that they have caused a chaotic situation. He felt the restructuring proposal was based on using a technicality to cover up a personality conflict.

Ron said that there was always disagreement in Berkeley. He felt that he had been deprived or lied to about his need for services. He wanted EDI to look out better for the clients.

Sean said that he was present to show support for Rose and Gina. He said he felt there was nothing wrong with the EDI management: that the ED's were doing a good job, and that he was uncomfortable with the single Executive Director model.

Inger said that she was proud of Gina and Rose and that it was hard to understand the call for changes.

Louie said that EDI's employees support Gina and Rose the best they can and asked the Board to listen and do the best they can.

Peggy said that she was in attendance representing the disability-themed radio show "Pushing Limits" on KPFA, and that she hoped the show would participate in the dialogue.

Nick said that it saddened him to see what was happening. He said the Board did not seem responsive to questions from the community. He said that he had a long history with EDI, CeCe Weeks, and Peter Trier. He has never been more upset. He said the Board had not lived up to the EDI Bylaws. He would have liked closed captioning for the Board meeting but does not want to see EDI's money go to CompassPoint. He condemned the Board to see it go backward so much and said that Gina and Rose should be given a chance to do their job.

John read a letter from Anthony Acampora which said that he did not know why, previously, Felix Knauth had been fired and that he feared for his own job if the restructuring went through. Anthony said that the Board was acting as a mob. He said that the buck does not stop with the Board but with the community and the taxpayers.

Rose said that she had been involved with EDI from the beginning and had acted in an executive capacity with the company for the last five years. She said that she had given her all to EDI. She said that she felt the restructuring was happening because Gina and Rose were unhappy with their evaluation. She also said that she felt the evening's discussion should suspend the planned Board Agenda.

Gina said that she had served two years as EDI Co-Executive Director and before that three years as Service Coordinator. She said that no one had ever said there was a problem with her performance before and that she was very upset about the restructuring.

At this point in the meeting, Stephanie attempted to close Public Comment, but there were many objections. Leslie moved to forget the Agenda and continue with Public Comment. John seconded, and the motion passed unanimously.

Belinda introduced herself as someone who has been working with the ED's on a van grant for the last couple of months.

Leslie said that Rose and Gina were doing a good job, but that that was not the reason for wanting a new Executive Director. She said the Board wanted someone with more experience as an ED, to help the agency grow and develop. She said that the Board had also realized it could not provide the oversight that Gina and Rose deserved and that sometimes Gina and Rose had come to the Board with questions that the Board could not answer. She said that a single Executive Director would give EDI more accountability; one clear leader. Leslie said that she appreciated everyone's comments and support of Rose and Gina.

Scott talked about organizational behavior. He said there was not a great chance of getting a good new ED for what EDI could afford to pay. He said that Gina and Rose were without insurmountable problems. He said he would like free mentoring from the disabled community at large for Rose and Gina. He said the Board should have made a greater effort to find out what Rose and Gina needed and to supply it. He concluded by saying that Rose and Gina were trusted by the community and that the decision to remove them should not have been made behind closed doors.

Michael Carter said that the Board was largely inexperienced, that they had made a mistake that they could not afford, and that they should admit they were wrong.

Scott said that an earlier comment that EDI should expand to other communities was naïve under the circumstances.

Glen said that he would hate to lose EDI. He said that the Board did not have a good reason to remove Rose and Gina and recommended that the Board take the pressure off of the co-ED's by canceling the restructuring. He said that the Board should let the ED's know what they are doing wrong and train them.

Nick recommended that no paid staff act as Board members and wanted to know why his closed-captioning request was not addressed.

Rose said that she was shocked that no one on the Board appeared prepared to discuss the restructuring issue. Gina confirmed that the Board needed to answer concerns and added that only Leslie was contributing anything.

Leslie said that she would investigate Nick's request for closed-captioning. Jonathan suggested that she also investigate whether Berkeley TV could televise the meeting.

Nick said the Board should spend money on training the ED's.

Dan said that he was offended by certain Board members and wanted to know why and how he was removed from the Board within 20 days or he would sue. He said the Board needed to move forward and should be elected by consumers and that the Board should support Rose and Gina and tell them they are doing a great job. He commented that EDI services were life and death for some consumers.

Mark said the Board had made an extensive effort to recruit new Board members for their recent elections and got a total of six applicants, one of whom dropped out.

Nick said that the Board needed more diversity and that the Board members should contact community leaders.

Jonathan said that community response to the Board would probably be better if the Board were community-elected. Leslie said that EDI could possibly have community elections. There followed a general discussion about setting up a committee to research what it would take to have community elections.

Nick asked if the Board had sufficient expertise.

Michael Carter said that the Board needed to be aware of the consequences of its actions.

Scott asked why anyone would want to serve on the EDI Board and said it would take time for the Board to attract good people.

Jonathan said that there was a misinterpretation of the Bylaws at the recent EDI Board elections and that Charles was still on the Board. The Board tacitly agreed.

Blane said that he thought that having employees on the Board was OK and commented that there were no seniors on the Board. He said he did not want to see so much polarization.

Stephanie said it had been difficult for her to be on the Board. She commented that many side issues were being raised and that the Board was being sidetracked by too much kibitzing.

Don said that the Board was trying their best.

Rose said that she felt that Gina and she had been responsible and that she does not see how bringing someone else in will work. She said that Gina and she would stick with EDI and that they have a track record.

Jonathan said the EDI Board made a mistake on the invasive care issue a few years ago.

Gina said that she was glad that one way or another she will remain with EDI. She commented that Rose and she think outside the box.

Hale said three things: 1. The Executive Director review took five months; longer than it should have but not the eight months mentioned earlier. 2. Jesse said earlier that you are only getting one side of the story. Several statements have been made for which the Board does not have the opportunity to respond because it would have revealed findings of the evaluation, which would have been highly improper. 3. He agrees with Blane that it is good to have staff representatives on the Board.

Scott said that he would like to see a notice on the Berkeley Disabled list that Gina and Rose will remain in their positions and that the Board will be reaching out to the community

Rose said that she would like a better idea of why this decision was made. Hale said he felt he needed to let that go by and said that the findings were given to the ED's in their review.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 P.M.